Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Casalino

95 N.E.2d 209, 301 N.Y. 715
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedOctober 19, 1950
StatusPublished

This text of 95 N.E.2d 209 (Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Casalino) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Casalino, 95 N.E.2d 209, 301 N.Y. 715 (N.Y. 1950).

Opinion

301 N.Y. 715 (1950)

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, Appellant,
v.
Pauline Casalino, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York.

Argued October 4, 1950.
Decided October 19, 1950

Charles R. McNamee, Harry Salvan and Stewart Maurice for appellant.

Evelyn Baker Richman, George F. Blake and Jesse S. Richman for Excise Bond Underwriters and others, amici curiæ, in support of appellant's position.

Samuel Jacobs for respondent.

Concur: LOUGHRAN, Ch. J., LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND, DYE, FULD and FROESSEL, JJ. [See 302 N.Y. 560.]

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

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

Related

Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Casalino
95 N.E.2d 209 (New York Court of Appeals, 1950)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
95 N.E.2d 209, 301 N.Y. 715, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartford-accident-indem-co-v-casalino-ny-1950.