Powell v. Holterman

200 A.D. 871

This text of 200 A.D. 871 (Powell v. Holterman) 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
Powell v. Holterman, 200 A.D. 871 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1922).

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Rich, Kelly and Manning, JJ., concur; Blackmar, P. J., and Jaycox, J., dissent, as they feel constrained by the decisions in Noreen v. Vogel & Bros., Inc. (231 N. Y. 317) and Boyle v. Cheney Piano Action Co. (193 App. Div. 408).

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

Related

Noreen v. William Vogel & Bros.
132 N.E. 102 (New York Court of Appeals, 1921)
Boyle v. A. C. Cheney Piano Action Co.
193 A.D. 408 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
200 A.D. 871, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/powell-v-holterman-nyappdiv-1922.