Kimbark v. . Waldemar Company
111 N.E. 1089, 217 N.Y. 610, 1916 N.Y. LEXIS 1362
Opinion
Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscock, Chase, Collin, Hogan and Cardozo, JJ. Dissenting: Seabury,. J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kimbark v. . Waldemar Company, 111 N.E. 1089, 217 N.Y. 610, 1916 N.Y. LEXIS 1362 (N.Y. 1916).
111 N.E. 1089 (Kimbark v. . Waldemar Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.