Opinion
December, 1912.
Present — Hirschberg, Burr, Thomas, Woodward and Rich, JJ.
Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Young v. L.H. Prentice Company of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1912
154 App. Div. 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)
Summaries of
Young v. L.H. Prentice Company of New York
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1912
154 App. Div. 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)
Case details for
Young v. L.H. Prentice Company of New York
Case Details
Full title:Wilson Young, Appellant, v. L.H. Prentice Company of New York, Respondent
Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Date published: Dec 1, 1912
Citations
154 App. Div. 907 (N.Y. App. Div. 1912)
Citing Cases
Talbert v. Chicago, Rock Island Pac. Railway
(b) An issue raised on the statement of a legal conclusion, which presents the real point in controversy,…
Adams Tire Co. v. Fuller(12) Defects and irregularities in the pleading of either party are cured by verdict or judgment. Young v.…