Cosgrove v. Ludlam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cosgrove v. Ludlam

248 A.D. 832, 290 N.Y.S. 841, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7527

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D. 832 (Cosgrove v. Ludlam) 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

Cosgrove v. Ludlam, 248 A.D. 832, 290 N.Y.S. 841, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7527 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover possession of certain antiques stored in the defendant’s warehouse or to recover the value thereof, judgment of the County Court of Nassau county in favor of the plaintiff reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide the event. The determination of the jury that defendant had knowledge that the antiques were in the Governor Winthrop secretary stored by plaintiff’s intestate is against the weight of the evidence. Appeal from order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial dismissed, without costs. No such order appears in the record. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover possession of certain antiques stored in the defendant’s warehouse or to recover the value thereof, judgment of the County Court of Nassau county in favor of the plaintiff reversed on the law and the facts and a new trial ordered, costs to appellant to abide the event. The determination of the jury that defendant had knowledge that the antiques were in the Governor Winthrop secretary stored by plaintiff’s intestate is against the weight of the evidence. Appeal from order denying defendant’s motion for a new trial dismissed, without costs. No such order appears in the record. Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Davis, Adel and Taylor, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D. 832, 290 N.Y.S. 841, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7527, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cosgrove-v-ludlam-nyappdiv-1936.