Kolb v. Kolb

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kolb v. Kolb

237 A.D. 910

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

DecidedJanuary 15, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 237 A.D. 910 (Kolb v. Kolb) 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

Kolb v. Kolb, 237 A.D. 910 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs. The inference sought to be drawn on the basis of an alleged untightened [911]*911rim-nut is not predicated on fact. The inference that the wheel came off is likewise without fact for its support. The case in principle is not unlike Higgins v. Mason (255 N. Y. 104). Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur; Young and Tompkins, JJ., dissent and vote for reversal and a new trial on the ground that there was a question of fact for submission to the jury.

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

Judgment affirmed, with costs. The inference sought to be drawn on the basis of an alleged untightened [911]*911rim-nut is not predicated on fact. The inference that the wheel came off is likewise without fact for its support. The case in principle is not unlike Higgins v. Mason (255 N. Y. 104). Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur; Young and Tompkins, JJ., dissent and vote for reversal and a new trial on the ground that there was a question of fact for submission to the jury.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D. 910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kolb-v-kolb-nyappdiv-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack