Fullerton v. Auto Car Equipment Co.
This text of 136 A.D. 943 (Fullerton v. Auto Car Equipment 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.
Opinion
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except McLennan, P. J., and Williams, J., who dissented upon the ground that the plaintiff’s assignor was not the procuring cause of the sale of the automobile by the defendant and that there was no consideration for the alleged promise by the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s assignor without his performing any service whatever.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
136 A.D. 943, 121 N.Y.S. 1131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fullerton-v-auto-car-equipment-co-nyappdiv-1910.