Hope v. . Troy and Lansingburgh Railroad Company
17 N.E. 873, 110 N.Y. 643, 1888 N.Y. LEXIS 944
Opinion
Agree to affirm; no opinion.
All concur, except Earl and Finch, JJ., who dissent on the ground of the exclusion of the evidence of the two physicians, offered by defendant, and Peckham, J., who takes no part.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hope v. . Troy and Lansingburgh Railroad Company, 17 N.E. 873, 110 N.Y. 643, 1888 N.Y. LEXIS 944 (N.Y. 1888).
17 N.E. 873 (Hope v. . Troy and Lansingburgh Railroad Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hethier v. Johns
198 A.D. 127 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1921)
Hirschberg v. Southern Pacific Co.
183 P. 141 (California Supreme Court, 1919)
Jacobs v. City of Cedar Rapids
181 Iowa 407 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1917)
Missouri & North Arkansas Railroad v. Daniels
136 S.W. 651 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1911)
Duggan v. Phelps
82 A.D. 509 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. v. Jacobi
112 F. 924 (Second Circuit, 1901)
Fox v. Union Turnpike Co.
59 A.D. 363 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)
Hennessy v. Kelley
55 A.D. 449 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)
Caven v. City of Troy
15 A.D. 163 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1897)