Claim of Marincel v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
359 N.E.2d 1368, 40 N.Y.2d 1032, 391 N.Y.S.2d 574, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 3157
This text of 359 N.E.2d 1368 (Claim of Marincel v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
Claim of Marincel v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 359 N.E.2d 1368, 40 N.Y.2d 1032, 391 N.Y.S.2d 574, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 3157 (N.Y. 1976).
Opinion
Order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division (50 AD2d 630).
Concur: Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchs-berg and Cooke. Taking no part: Chief Judge Breitel.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Claim of Nizich v. Robert F. Barreca, Inc.
86 A.D.2d 917 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
359 N.E.2d 1368, 40 N.Y.2d 1032, 391 N.Y.S.2d 574, 1976 N.Y. LEXIS 3157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-marincel-v-goodyear-tire-rubber-co-ny-1976.