Forney v. Engineering News Publishing Co.
10 N.Y.S. 814, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 999
Opinion
It does not seem necessary to discuss at large the questions presented upon this appeal. The facts are distinctly stated in the opinion of the court below, and the grounds upon which the relief should be refused to the plaintiff are there correctly set forth. The cases of Stokes v. Allen, 9 N. Y. Supp. 846, (decided at the May term of this court,) and Richardson v. Richardson, 8 N. Y. Supp. 52, also serve to illustrate the correctness, of the conclusions arrived at. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Forney v. Engineering News Publishing Co., 10 N.Y.S. 814, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 999 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1890).
10 N.Y.S. 814 (Forney v. Engineering News Publishing Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Carroll v. Duluth Superior Milling Co.
232 F. 675 (Eighth Circuit, 1916)
Gannett v. Ruppert
119 F. 221 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1902)
Tuerk Hydraulic Power Co. v. Tuerk
36 N.Y.S. 384 (New York Supreme Court, 1895)