Opinion
Argued January 27, 1890
Decided January 31, 1890
Austen G. Fox for appellant.
H.H. Hustis for respondent.
GRAY, J., reads for reversal of orders of Special and General Term, and for granting the motion.
All concur.
Ordered accordingly.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
New York Rubber Company v. Rothery
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 31, 1890
23 N.E. 529 (N.Y. 1890)
Summaries of
New York Rubber Company v. Rothery
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 31, 1890
23 N.E. 529 (N.Y. 1890)
Case details for
New York Rubber Company v. Rothery
Case Details
Full title:THE NEW YORK RUBBER COMPANY, Appellant, v . JOHN ROTHERY et al.…
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Jan 31, 1890
Citations
23 N.E. 529 (N.Y. 1890)
23 N.E. 529
29 N.Y. St. Rptr. 37
Citing Cases
Zimmer v. Metropolitan Street R. Co.
That was an appeal from an order denying a motion to resettle the case, and the court reversed the order and…
People v. PrioriIt is the policy of the law in all cases, both civil and criminal, to provide a truthful record of the…