Opinion
Argued October 19, 1937
Decided November 16, 1937
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.
Everett D. Mereness and Milo R. Kniffen for appellants. Sharon J. Mauhs for respondent.
We are in agreement with the Appellate Division in the conclusion which it reached. We are of the opinion, however, that the amendment of section 139 of the Tax Law (Cons. Laws, ch. 60), under the facts of this case, effected a mere change of procedure and was, therefore, constitutional even between private parties. (Cf. Curtis v. Whitney, 80 U.S. 68; Conley v. Barton, 260 U.S. 677.)
The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
CRANE, Ch. J., LEHMAN, O'BRIEN, HUBBS, LOUGHRAN, FINCH and RIPPEY, JJ., concur.
Judgment affirmed, etc.