Danks v. Quackenbush
Danks v. Quackenbush, 3 Denio 594 (1848)
Headnotes
Statutes not in terms retrospective, should not be construed to affect past transactions, especially where such construction would work injustice.
So it, seems that the act to exempt certain property from sale on execution, (Stat. 1842, p. 193,) does not affect executions for debts contracted before its passage ; but if it admits of that construction,
Held that it conflicts with the provision in the constitution of the United States forbidding any state to pass a law impairing the obligation of contracts, and is so far void.
Summary
On error to the supreme court to review a judgment of that court reversing one rendered by the Onondaga common pleas. For a report of the case see 1 Denio, 128. The question was whether the act exempting certain property from distress for rent and sale under execution, (Stat. 1842, p. 193,) constitutionally extended to contracts existing when the act was passed. The supreme court held that it did not.
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
The cause having been argued by counsel, and time having been taken for deliberation, the judgment of the supreme court was affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 6 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.