O'Connell v. Jacobs
611 N.E.2d 289, 81 N.Y.2d 797, 595 N.Y.S.2d 388, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 203
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs. We agree for the reasons stated by the Appellate Division (181 AD2d 1064) that the admissible evidence was insufficient to sustain the verdict.
Concur: Acting Chief Judge Simons and Judges Kaye, Ti-tone, Hancock, Jr., Bellacosa and Smith.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
O'Connell v. Jacobs, 611 N.E.2d 289, 81 N.Y.2d 797, 595 N.Y.S.2d 388, 1993 N.Y. LEXIS 203 (N.Y. 1993).
611 N.E.2d 289 (O'Connell v. Jacobs) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Richbell Information Services, Inc. v. Jupiter Partners L.P.
32 A.D.3d 150 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Wolff v. Mahrer
273 A.D.2d 812 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Jarvis v. Eastman
202 A.D.2d 826 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)