Sears v. Hetfield
225 A.D. 892, 233 N.Y.S. 889
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Sears v. Hetfield. Read the opinion of the Court — 216 A.D. 767 →
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 15, 1929·Published
Opinion
Judgment and order reversed upon the law and the facts and new trial granted, costs to appellant to abide the event. It was error to charge the jury that if the services were rendered to the corporation, even though decedent requested plaintiff to perform them, there could be no recovery. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Seeger and Scudder, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Sears v. Hetfield, 225 A.D. 892, 233 N.Y.S. 889 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1929).
225 A.D. 892 (Sears v. Hetfield) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.