Howell, MacArthur & Wiggin, Inc. v. Putnam

242 A.D. 893

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Plaintiff moved for an order striking out a separate defense in the answer, and also for summary judgment. Order denying motion is affirmed. The record does not disclose upon what theory the former action was disposed of. Hill, P. J., McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur; Bliss, J., dissents.

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

Howell, MacArthur & Wiggin, Inc. v. Putnam, 242 A.D. 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

242 A.D. 893 (Howell, MacArthur & Wiggin, Inc. v. Putnam) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.