Casteel v. Clarence Hodson & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Casteel v. Clarence Hodson & Co.

258 A.D. 953, 17 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8384

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 26, 1940·Published

Opinion

—■ Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — O’Malley, Glennon, Untermyer, Dore and Callahan, JJ.; Untermyer and Callahan, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse and grant a new trial upon the ground that the holding by the court that as matter of law the plaintiff was entitled to recover commissions on sales made outside the principal territory named in the contract of hiring was improper.

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

—■ Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — O’Malley, Glennon, Untermyer, Dore and Callahan, JJ.; Untermyer and Callahan, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse and grant a new trial upon the ground that the holding by the court that as matter of law the plaintiff was entitled to recover commissions on sales made outside the principal territory named in the contract of hiring was improper.

Casteel v. Clarence Hodson & Co., 258 A.D. 953, 17 N.Y.S.2d 870, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8384 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

258 A.D. 953 (Casteel v. Clarence Hodson & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.