Fritz v. Friedland

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fritz v. Friedland

209 A.D. 889

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

DecidedJune 15, 1924

StatusPublished

This text of 209 A.D. 889 (Fritz v. Friedland) 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

Fritz v. Friedland, 209 A.D. 889 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed on the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event, on the ground that the facts proven were such as to require submission of the question as to whether reasonable care did not require defendant to more securely pile the lumber, or to guard and protect it. (Earl v. Crouch, 10 N. Y. Supp. 882.) Kelly, P. J., Rich, Jaycox, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.

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

Judgment reversed on the facts and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event, on the ground that the facts proven were such as to require submission of the question as to whether reasonable care did not require defendant to more securely pile the lumber, or to guard and protect it. (Earl v. Crouch, 10 N. Y. Supp. 882.) Kelly, P. J., Rich, Jaycox, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D. 889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fritz-v-friedland-nyappdiv-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack