Lindner v. Hilo Varnish Corp.

235 A.D. 851

This text of 235 A.D. 851 (Lindner v. Hilo Varnish 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
Lindner v. Hilo Varnish Corp., 235 A.D. 851 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Opinion

Order denying motion to settle and frame issues affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Seudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Davis, J., dissents and votes to reverse on the ground that defendant Uehlinger was entitled to a jury trial as a matter of right, and as he made a motion to separate the issues there could be no waiver.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
235 A.D. 851, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lindner-v-hilo-varnish-corp-nyappdiv-1932.