Gaffney v. Bigelow
2 Abb. N. Cas. 311
Opinion
were of opinion that the indorsement on the envelope to return in five days did not prejudice the party to whom it was addressed unless it was made to appear that, by reason of the return in obedience to the indorsement, the party failed to receive it. It appearing in this case that the papers were received, notwithstanding the indorsement, the order was reversed.
Present, Mullin, P. J., and E. Darwin Smith and J. W. Gilbert, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Gaffney v. Bigelow, 2 Abb. N. Cas. 311 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1876).
2 Abb. N. Cas. 311 (Gaffney v. Bigelow) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Perl v. New York City Housing Authority
35 Misc. 2d 92 (New York Supreme Court, 1962)
Drake v. Comptroller
278 A.D. 317 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1951)
Buffalo Cadillac Corp. v. Eisele
148 Misc. 592 (New York Supreme Court, 1933)
Saffold v. Fellows
128 Misc. 422 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1926)
Sears v. Tenhagen
50 Misc. 275 (New York County Courts, 1906)
Price v. City of New York
104 A.D. 198 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1905)
Appeal Printing Co. v. Sherman
99 A.D. 533 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
Manchester v. Van Brunt
22 N.Y.S. 362 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1893)
Manchester v. Van Brunt
19 N.Y.S. 685 (City of New York Municipal Court, 1892)