Seeck & Kade, Inc. v. Tomshinsky
200 N.E. 23, 269 N.Y. 613, 1936 N.Y. LEXIS 1416
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, with costs, on the authority of Doubleday, Doran & Co. v. Macy & Co. (269 N. Y. 272). No opinion.
Concur; Crañe, Ch, J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Seeck & Kade, Inc. v. Tomshinsky, 200 N.E. 23, 269 N.Y. 613, 1936 N.Y. LEXIS 1416 (N.Y. 1936).
200 N.E. 23 (Seeck & Kade, Inc. v. Tomshinsky) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Lilly Co. v. . Saunders
4 S.E.2d 528 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1939)
Bourjois Sales Corp. v. Dorfman
7 N.E.2d 30 (New York Court of Appeals, 1937)