Overland-Knight Co. v. MacCollum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Overland-Knight Co. v. MacCollum

235 A.D. 660

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 15, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 235 A.D. 660 (Overland-Knight Co. v. MacCollum) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Overland-Knight Co. v. MacCollum, 235 A.D. 660 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs. We do not consider on this appeal the question whether the judgment should be without prejudice, or intend in any way to intimate whether the judgment should be without prejudice or not. It is open to the appellant to make application to the Special Term for a modification of the judgment in this respect, if he deems himself entitled to a modification. (See Ziegler v. International Railway Co., 232 App. Div. 43.) All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Crouch, Edgcomb, Thompson and Crosby, JJ.

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

Judgment affirmed, with costs. We do not consider on this appeal the question whether the judgment should be without prejudice, or intend in any way to intimate whether the judgment should be without prejudice or not. It is open to the appellant to make application to the Special Term for a modification of the judgment in this respect, if he deems himself entitled to a modification. (See Ziegler v. International Railway Co., 232 App. Div. 43.) All concur. Present — Sears, P. J., Crouch, Edgcomb, Thompson and Crosby, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

235 A.D. 660, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/overland-knight-co-v-maccollum-nyappdiv-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack