Condon v. Aaron Buchsbaum Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Condon v. Aaron Buchsbaum Co.

171 A.D. 899, 155 N.Y.S. 1099

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 15, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 171 A.D. 899 (Condon v. Aaron Buchsbaum Co.) 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

Condon v. Aaron Buchsbaum Co., 171 A.D. 899, 155 N.Y.S. 1099 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

We think a question of fact was presented by the evidence which should have been sent to the jury. The dismissal of the complaint was, therefore, error, and the judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Dowling, JJ.; Ingraham, P. J., dissented. Judgment reversed, new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide event.

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

Per Curiam:

We think a question of fact was presented by the evidence which should have been sent to the jury. The dismissal of the complaint was, therefore, error, and the judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Present — Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Laughlin, Clarke and Dowling, JJ.; Ingraham, P. J., dissented. Judgment reversed, new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 A.D. 899, 155 N.Y.S. 1099, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/condon-v-aaron-buchsbaum-co-nyappdiv-1915.