Backenstos v. Holmes

183 A.D. 908

This text of 183 A.D. 908 (Backenstos v. Holmes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Backenstos v. Holmes, 183 A.D. 908 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1918).

Opinion

No opinion. Jenks, P. J., Mills, Putnam and Kelly, JJ., concurred; Blaekmar, J., dissented upon the ground that the judgment cannot be affirmed without overruling the ease of Patterson v. Youngs (154 App. Div. 536).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Patterson v. Youngs
154 A.D. 536 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
183 A.D. 908, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/backenstos-v-holmes-nyappdiv-1918.