McClelland v. Climax Hosiery Mills

171 N.E. 770, 253 N.Y. 533, 1930 N.Y. LEXIS 896
New York Court of Appeals·Decided February 18, 1930·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Motion for reargument or to amend remittitur. (See 252 N. Y. 347.)

Motion granted. Recall of remittitur requested and the same, when recalled, will be amended by striking out *534 the direction for the reassessment of the damages, and in lieu thereof directing judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the amount demanded in the amended complaint, with costs in all courts.

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

McClelland v. Climax Hosiery Mills, 171 N.E. 770, 253 N.Y. 533, 1930 N.Y. LEXIS 896 (N.Y. 1930).

171 N.E. 770 (McClelland v. Climax Hosiery Mills) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sudul v. Computer Outsourcing Services, Inc.
917 F. Supp. 1033 (S.D. New York, 1996)
Rivera v. Laporte
120 Misc. 2d 733 (New York Supreme Court, 1983)