Meyers v. Stix
28 N.Y.S. 1144, 8 Misc. 680, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 286
Opinion
We see little or no difference between the facts as presented on the former trial (reported in 13 N. Y. Supp. 301) and upon this. On the former appeal we held that there was a trilateral agreement between the parties, and we see no reason to recede from that, upon the facts presented in this. We think, therefore, this judgment is proper, and should be affirmed, with costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Meyers v. Stix, 28 N.Y.S. 1144, 8 Misc. 680, 59 N.Y. St. Rep. 286 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1894).
28 N.Y.S. 1144 (Meyers v. Stix) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Meyers v. Stix
13 N.Y.S. 301 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1891)