Case Name: Pathe Exchange, Inc., Appellant, v. George H. Cobb et al., Constituting the Motion Picture Commission of the State of New York, Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1923-05-08
Citations: 236 N.Y. 539
Docket Number: 
Parties: Pathe Exchange, Inc., Appellant, v. George H. Cobb et al., Constituting the Motion Picture Commission of the State of New York, Respondents.
Judges: Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Pound, MqLaugh-lin, Crane and Andrews, JJ. Absent: Cardozo, J.
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 236
Pages: 539–540

Head Matter:
Pathe Exchange, Inc., Appellant, v. George H. Cobb et al., Constituting the Motion Picture Commission of the State of New York, Respondents.
Constitutional law — motion 'picture commission — provision of statute requiring submission of news reels to commission before exhibition contravenes neither State nor Federal Constitutions.
Pathe Exchange v. Cobb, 202 App. Div. 450, affirmed.
(Argued April 24, 1923;
decided May 8, 1923.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered August 28, 1922, in favor of defendants upon the submission of a controversy under sections 546-548 of the Civil Practice Act. The question was whether chapter 715 of the Laws of 1921, which created a commission known as the “ motion picture commission,” investing it with certain power and authority in the regulation of the exhibition of motion pictures, was in violation of section 8 of article 1 of the Constitution of the state of New York and of the fourteenth amendment to the United States Constitution, in so far as the same compelled the producers of motion picture reels com monly known as “ Current Events Film ” under the designation of “ Pathe News,” to submit such reels to the motion picture commission of the state of New York to be censored prior to the exhibition thereof in a public place of amusement. The Appellate Division held that said chapter 715 of the Laws of 1921 did not contravene the provisions of the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the state of New York relative to the liberty of the press.
Frederic R. Coudert, Howard Thayer Kingsbury and P. A. Shay for appellant.
Carl Sherman, Attorney-General (Arthur E. Rose of counsel), for respondents.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, without costs; no opinion.
Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Hogan, Pound, MqLaugh-lin, Crane and Andrews, JJ. Absent: Cardozo, J.