Harkins v. Sizer Forge Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Harkins v. Sizer Forge Co.

186 A.D. 937

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 15, 1918·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order entered July 2, 1918, vacated, and decision [938] amended and order entered thereon, as follows: Judgment and order reversed, with costs, and this court having determined that the trial court should have granted the defendant’s motion for the direction of a verdict, the complaint is dismissed, with costs. Held, that the plaintiff failed to establish actionable negligence. All concurred, except Kruse, P. J., who dissented and voted for affirmance.

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

Order entered July 2, 1918, vacated, and decision [938] amended and order entered thereon, as follows: Judgment and order reversed, with costs, and this court having determined that the trial court should have granted the defendant’s motion for the direction of a verdict, the complaint is dismissed, with costs. Held, that the plaintiff failed to establish actionable negligence. All concurred, except Kruse, P. J., who dissented and voted for affirmance.

Harkins v. Sizer Forge Co., 186 A.D. 937 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1918).

Pincite

186 A.D. 937 (Harkins v. Sizer Forge Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related