McLaughlin v. Audley Clarke Company

168 N.E. 407, 251 N.Y. 507, 1929 N.Y. LEXIS 748
New York Court of Appeals·Decided May 28, 1929·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, upon the authority of McNamara v. Leipzig (227 N. Y. 291); Matter of Schweitzer v. Thompson & Norris Co. (229 N. Y. 97); Braxton v. *508 Mendelson (233 N. Y. 122); Charles v. Barrett (233 N. Y. 127); Meade v. Motor Haulage Co., Inc. (233 N. Y. 527); Cattini v. American Railway Express Co. (234 N. Y. 585); Bartolomeo v. Bennett Contracting Co.,Inc. (245 N. Y. 66).

Caedozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Lehman, Kellogg, O’Brien and Hubbs, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, etc.

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

McLaughlin v. Audley Clarke Company, 168 N.E. 407, 251 N.Y. 507, 1929 N.Y. LEXIS 748 (N.Y. 1929).

168 N.E. 407 (McLaughlin v. Audley Clarke Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Martucci v. Eskay Coal & Fuel Corp.
257 A.D. 998 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1939)
Irwin v. Klein
3 N.E.2d 601 (New York Court of Appeals, 1936)