Kinney Corp. v. Costich Development Corp.

225 A.D. 723

This text of 225 A.D. 723 (Kinney Corp. v. Costich Development Corp.) 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
Kinney Corp. v. Costich Development Corp., 225 A.D. 723 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1928).

Opinion

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. (See Bennett v. Edison Electric Illuminating Co., 164 N. Y. 131; Boisnot v. Wilson, 95 App. Div. 489; Claffy v. Madison Ave. Co., 124 id. 774; Steck v. Colorado Fuel & Iron Co., 142 N. Y. 236.) All concur, except Hubbs, P. J., who dissents and votes for reversal upon the ground that the cases cited are not controlling in this case and that under section 424 of the Civil Practice Act the defendants are entitled to a jury trial. Present — Hubbs, P. J., Clark, Crouch, Taylor and Sawyer, JJ.

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

Related

Bennett v. Edison Electric Illuminating Co.
58 N.E. 7 (New York Court of Appeals, 1900)
Steck v. Colorado Fuel & Iron Co.
37 N.E. 1 (New York Court of Appeals, 1894)
Boisnot v. Wilson
95 A.D. 489 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 A.D. 723, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kinney-corp-v-costich-development-corp-nyappdiv-1928.