Cumming v. Middletown, Unionville & Water Gap Railroad

152 A.D. 907
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Cumming v. Middletown, Unionville & Water Gap Railroad. Read the opinion of the Court — 147 A.D. 105

Opinion

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, without passing upon the sufficiency of the defense of the Statute of Limitations. No opinion. Hirschberg, Burr, Thomas, Woodward and Rich, JJ., concurred.

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

Cumming v. Middletown, Unionville & Water Gap Railroad, 152 A.D. 907 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1912).

152 A.D. 907 (Cumming v. Middletown, Unionville & Water Gap Railroad) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.