 A person has no property, no vested interest, in any rule of the common law. That is only one of the forms of municipal law, and is no more sacred than any other.  The Pacific Reporter - Side 1541916Uten tilgangsbegrensning - Om denne boken
 | New Jersey. Supreme Court - 1917 - 840 sider
...States held that a person has no property or vested interest in any rule of common law, and that while rights of property which have been created by the...common law cannot be taken away without due process, yet the law itself as a rule of conduct may be changed at the will of the legislature, unless prevented... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1891 - 782 sider
...or forego the use. But a mere common-law regulation of trade or business may be changed by statute. A person has no property, no vested interest, in any...sacred than any other. Rights of property which have beeu created by the common law cannot be taken away without due process; but the law itself, as a rule... | |
 | Michigan. Supreme Court, Randolph Manning, George C. Gibbs, Thomas McIntyre Cooley, Elijah W. Meddaugh, William Jennison, Hovey K. Clarke, Hoyt Post, Henry Allen Chaney, William Dudley Fuller, John Adams Brooks, Marquis B. Eaton, Herschel Bouton Lazell, James M. Reasoner, Richard W. Cooper - 1913 - 804 sider
...not deprive railroad corporations of the equal protection of the laws. 5. SAME — VESTED INTERESTS. A person has no property, no vested interest in any rule of the 1As to servant's assumption of risk of master's breach of statutory duty, see notes in 6 LRA (NS) 981;... | |
 | Nebraska. Supreme Court, David Allen Campbell, Guy Ashton Brown, Lorenzo Crounse, Walter Alber Leese, Lee Herdmen, Henry Clay Lindsay, Henry Paxon Stoddart - 1902 - 1050 sider
...conditions, or other reasons, it may become inrtt'ectual for the preservation of public or private rights. "A person has no property, no vested interest, in any rule of the common law." Munn r>. Ill'inm*. 94 F. 8., 113, 134. Neither is there such a thing as a vested right in any particular... | |
 | Illinois - 1877 - 182 sider
...or forego the use. But a mere common-law regulation of trade or business may be changed by statute. A person has no property, no vested interest in any rule of the common law. That is only one of the fojms of municipal law, and is no more sacred than any other. Kights of property which have been created... | |
 | Pacific railroads - 1878 - 800 sider
...these earnings among the stockholders of this corporation as against the creditors. That is only oue of the forms of municipal law, and is no more, sacred...process ; but the law itself, as a rule of conduct, mav be changed at the will, or even at the whim, of the Legislature, unless prevented by constitutional... | |
 | 1885 - 1902 sider
...in a prosecution by a state for murder; and in Munn v. Illinois, 94 US 115, the chief justice says : "A person has no property, no vested interest, in...of the common law. That is only one of the forms of the municipal law, and is no more sacred than any other. * * The law itself, as a rule of conduct,... | |
 | Thomas McIntyre Cooley - 1880 - 426 sider
...forced sale on execution, and exemption from jury duty, are all within the principle. Even an exemp1 " A person has no property, no vested interest, in any rule of the common law. . . . Rights of property, which have been created by the common law, cannot be taken away without due... | |
 | Edward Lillie Pierce - 1881 - 684 sider
...regulate at all. . . . But a mere common-law regulation of trade or business may be changed by statute. A person has no property, no vested interest, in any rule of the common law. . . . To limit the rate of charge for services rendered in a public employment, or for the use of property... | |
 | Ohio State Bar Association - 1914 - 294 sider
...page 50, overruled the contention that such an act violated the Federal Constitution, and said: — "A person has no property, no vested interest, in any rule of the common law. This is only one of the forms of municipal law, and is no more sacred than any other." When I read... | |
| |
