Hoban-Hunter-Feitner Co. v. Parshelsky Bros.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hoban-Hunter-Feitner Co. v. Parshelsky Bros.

171 A.D. 934, 156 N.Y.S. 1127

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 171 A.D. 934 (Hoban-Hunter-Feitner Co. v. Parshelsky Bros.) 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

Hoban-Hunter-Feitner Co. v. Parshelsky Bros., 171 A.D. 934, 156 N.Y.S. 1127 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

We think there was a fair question for the jury and that their verdict should not have been disturbed. The order appealed from is, therefore, reversed, with costs, the motion to set aside the verdict denied and the verdict reinstated. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clark, Dowling and Smith, JJ. Order reversed, with costs, and motion to set aside verdict denied and verdict reinstated.

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

Per Curiam:

We think there was a fair question for the jury and that their verdict should not have been disturbed. The order appealed from is, therefore, reversed, with costs, the motion to set aside the verdict denied and the verdict reinstated. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Laughlin, Clark, Dowling and Smith, JJ. Order reversed, with costs, and motion to set aside verdict denied and verdict reinstated.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 A.D. 934, 156 N.Y.S. 1127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoban-hunter-feitner-co-v-parshelsky-bros-nyappdiv-1915.