Kettle v. Turl
14 Misc. 637
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Kettle v. Turl. Read the opinion of the Court — 34 N.Y.S. 75 →
Opinion
The points " severally alluded to by the
appellant, as having been overlooked by the- court in its decision of the appeal, appear from the opinion to have been duly considered. The case' of Chisholm v. State, 141 N. Y. 246, does not limit Weston v. Troy, cited in the opinion of the General Term, but distinguishes it only, and nowise affects its application to the case at bar.
Motion for reargument denied; no costs.
Present: Daly, Ch. J,, Bischofe and Pbyob, JJ.
Motion denied, without costs. '
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kettle v. Turl, 14 Misc. 637 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1895).
14 Misc. 637 (Kettle v. Turl) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Chisholm v. . State
36 N.E. 184 (New York Court of Appeals, 1894)