King v. Friendship Engine & Hose Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

King v. Friendship Engine & Hose Co.

249 A.D. 623, 292 N.Y.S. 165, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5284

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

DecidedNovember 6, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 249 A.D. 623 (King v. Friendship Engine & Hose Co.) 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

King v. Friendship Engine & Hose Co., 249 A.D. 623, 292 N.Y.S. 165, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5284 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Peremptory mandamus order dated October 18, 1935, directing appellant to reinstate respondent as a member of appellant reversed on the law and the facts, with costs; motion denied, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and proceeding dismissed. Appeal from order dated July 23,1935, granting an alternative mandamus order, dismissed. The findings of the jury upon the questions submitted to them are reversed, and this court finds that the respondent was accorded a fair trial upon the charges in question on January 4, 1935; that the charges were sustained by the evidence on such trial; that only two members of the executive board, which tried the petitioner, preferred charges against him, and that no delay on the part of the appellant in proceeding for the petitioner’s removal was in any way prejudicial to the petitioner. In our opinion, the verdict of the jury was contrary to the evidence appearing in this record. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.

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

Peremptory mandamus order dated October 18, 1935, directing appellant to reinstate respondent as a member of appellant reversed on the law and the facts, with costs; motion denied, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and proceeding dismissed. Appeal from order dated July 23,1935, granting an alternative mandamus order, dismissed. The findings of the jury upon the questions submitted to them are reversed, and this court finds that the respondent was accorded a fair trial upon the charges in question on January 4, 1935; that the charges were sustained by the evidence on such trial; that only two members of the executive board, which tried the petitioner, preferred charges against him, and that no delay on the part of the appellant in proceeding for the petitioner’s removal was in any way prejudicial to the petitioner. In our opinion, the verdict of the jury was contrary to the evidence appearing in this record. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Johnston and Taylor, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D. 623, 292 N.Y.S. 165, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5284, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-friendship-engine-hose-co-nyappdiv-1936.