Opinion
Argued January 9, 1899
Decided January 17, 1899
William L. Turner for motion.
Eustace Conway opposed.
Motion granted and appeal dismissed, with costs and ten dollars costs of motion, on authority of Sidwell v. Greig ( 157 N.Y. 30).
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Camacho v. Hamilton Bank Note Engraving & Printing Co.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 17, 1899
52 N.E. 1124 (N.Y. 1899)
Summaries of
Camacho v. Hamilton Bank Note Engraving & Printing Co.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 17, 1899
52 N.E. 1124 (N.Y. 1899)
Case details for
Camacho v. Hamilton Bank Note Engraving & Printing Co.
Case Details
Full title:SIMON B. CAMACHO, Appellant, v . THE HAMILTON BANK NOTE ENGRAVING AND…
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Jan 17, 1899
Citations
52 N.E. 1124 (N.Y. 1899)
52 N.E. 1124