Hannan v. Cary
159 A.D. 937, 145 N.Y.S. 1126
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 15, 1913·Published
Opinion
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concurred, except Kruse, P. J., and Lambert, J., who dissented upon the ground that there was such an unauthorized assumption of ownership over the house in question as amounted to a conversion. A specific demand of possession by plaintiff was not necessary under the circumstances.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hannan v. Cary, 159 A.D. 937, 145 N.Y.S. 1126 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1913).
159 A.D. 937 (Hannan v. Cary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.