Hancock v. Syracuse Newspapers, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hancock v. Syracuse Newspapers, Inc.

261 A.D. 1037, 25 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8623

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

DecidedMarch 5, 1941

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D. 1037 (Hancock v. Syracuse Newspapers, Inc.) 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

Hancock v. Syracuse Newspapers, Inc., 261 A.D. 1037, 25 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8623 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: We are of the opinion that the evidence presents an issue of fact as to whether [1038]*1038the legal services, which the plaintiffs performed, were rendered to the defendant or to the defendant’s president as an individual, which issue of fact should have been submitted to the jury. We are also of the opinion that the Defendant’s Exhibit 11 for Identification should have been admitted in evidence. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiffs in an action to recover for legal services. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Taylor, Dowling and Harris, JJ.

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

Judgment and order reversed on the law and facts and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. Memorandum: We are of the opinion that the evidence presents an issue of fact as to whether [1038]*1038the legal services, which the plaintiffs performed, were rendered to the defendant or to the defendant’s president as an individual, which issue of fact should have been submitted to the jury. We are also of the opinion that the Defendant’s Exhibit 11 for Identification should have been admitted in evidence. All concur. (The judgment is for plaintiffs in an action to recover for legal services. The order denies a motion for a new trial.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Taylor, Dowling and Harris, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D. 1037, 25 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8623, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hancock-v-syracuse-newspapers-inc-nyappdiv-1941.