Lombardi v. United Hoisting Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lombardi v. United Hoisting Co.

230 A.D. 742

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

DecidedJune 15, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 230 A.D. 742 (Lombardi v. United Hoisting Co.) 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

Lombardi v. United Hoisting Co., 230 A.D. 742 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, in so far as appealed from, affirmed, with costs to plaintiff against defendant Joseph Holme, Inc. No opinion. Young, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Kapper, J., dissents upon the ground that the operation of the elevator was not the proximate cause of the accident; Lazansky, P. J., dissents upon the ground stated by Kapper, J., and upon the further ground that at the time of the accident the hoisting apparatus was not in the control of appellant Joseph Holme, Inc., and Milne was not in its employment.

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

Judgment, in so far as appealed from, affirmed, with costs to plaintiff against defendant Joseph Holme, Inc. No opinion. Young, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Kapper, J., dissents upon the ground that the operation of the elevator was not the proximate cause of the accident; Lazansky, P. J., dissents upon the ground stated by Kapper, J., and upon the further ground that at the time of the accident the hoisting apparatus was not in the control of appellant Joseph Holme, Inc., and Milne was not in its employment.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 A.D. 742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lombardi-v-united-hoisting-co-nyappdiv-1930.