Pratter v. Lascoff
236 A.D. 713
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 15, 1932·Published·Cited by 5 cases
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the authority of Liggett Co. v. Baldridge (278 U. S. 105), by which decision we feel bound, inasmuch as we find no facts or circumstances of substance differentiating the'two eases. All concur, except Edgcomb and Thompson, JJ., who dissent and vote for reversal on the law and for dismissal of the complaint upon the reasoning contained in the opinion of Lewis, J., in Hauges v. Lascoff (140 Misc. 811). [140 Misc. 211.]
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Pratter v. Lascoff, 236 A.D. 713 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).
236 A.D. 713 (Pratter v. Lascoff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Magan Medical Clinic v. Cal. State Bd. of Med. Examiners
249 Cal. App. 2d 124 (California Court of Appeal, 1967)
Russo v. Hults
45 Misc. 2d 807 (New York Supreme Court, 1965)
People v. Schwebel
44 Misc. 2d 1035 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1965)
Loblaw, Inc. v. New York State Board of Pharmacy
22 Misc. 2d 131 (New York Supreme Court, 1960)
Welling v. Buck
184 Misc. 322 (New York Supreme Court, 1945)