King v. Liebeskind
8 N.Y.S. 959, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1930
This text of 8 N.Y.S. 959 (King v. Liebeskind) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Bluebook
King v. Liebeskind, 8 N.Y.S. 959, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1930 (superctny 1890).
Opinion
The pleadings are not before us, and for that reason there' is nothing to show that the judge at special term erred in denying plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the demurrer as frivolous, and for the relief demanded in the complaint. Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
8 N.Y.S. 959, 1890 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-liebeskind-superctny-1890.