Bainbridge v. Hoes
163 A.D. 870, 149 N.Y.S. 20
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 15, 1914·Published·Cited by 10 cases
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, without costs, upon the opinion of William Allaire Shortt, referee. It may be that the plaintiff has some remedy against the administrator upon contract. Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Rich and Stapleton, JJ., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bainbridge v. Hoes, 163 A.D. 870, 149 N.Y.S. 20 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).
163 A.D. 870 (Bainbridge v. Hoes) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
The Estate of David F. Oaks v. Lynne Stouff
2020 WI App 29 (Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, 2020)
McGuire v. Wanamaker
273 A.D. 1022 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1948)
Standard Factors Corp. v. Manufacturers Trust Co.
182 Misc. 701 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1944)
Day v. Commissioner
42 B.T.A. 109 (Board of Tax Appeals, 1940)
Pikeville Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Shirley
135 S.W.2d 426 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1939)
In re the Estate of Ludlam
158 Misc. 283 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1936)
People v. Continental Casualty Co.
157 Misc. 15 (New York Supreme Court, 1935)
In re the Estate of Alex
148 Misc. 317 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1933)
Bacal v. National City Bank
146 Misc. 732 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1933)
In re the Estate of Heaney
136 Misc. 221 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1930)