Milkman v. Casesa
175 A.D. 904
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 15, 1916·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
—Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs, without prejudice to the respondent to renew said motion on additional affidavits setting forth facts and circumstances sufficient to indicate that the plaintiff has a good cause of action on the merits. (See Heischober v. Polishook,, 158 App. Div. 193; Rothschild v. Haviland, 178 id. 562.) Carr, Stapleton, Mills, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Milkman v. Casesa, 175 A.D. 904 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).
175 A.D. 904 (Milkman v. Casesa) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Wanaksink Lake Development Corp. v. Hannan
198 A.D. 46 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1921)