Opinion
May, 1917.
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except Foote and Merrell, JJ., who dissented upon the ground that it was error to admit evidence of paralysis under the allegations of the complaint.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Kurak v. Traiche
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 1, 1917
178 App. Div. 952 (N.Y. App. Div. 1917)
Summaries of
Kurak v. Traiche
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
May 1, 1917
178 App. Div. 952 (N.Y. App. Div. 1917)
Case details for
Kurak v. Traiche
Case Details
Full title:PETER KURAK, Respondent, v. PETER TRAICHE, Appellant
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Date published: May 1, 1917
Citations
178 App. Div. 952 (N.Y. App. Div. 1917)