Home/The Superior Court of New York City/King v. Liebeskind

King v. Liebeskind

26 Jones & S. 580
The Superior Court of New York City·Decided March 4, 1890·Published

Opinion

The pleadings were not before the general term. For that reason the Court (Per Curiam) held there was nothing to show that the court below erred, and affirmed the order.

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

King v. Liebeskind, 26 Jones & S. 580 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1890).

26 Jones & S. 580 (King v. Liebeskind) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.