Sirota v. Shacknovitz

212 A.D. 884

Opinion

Upon reargument, judgment reversed on the law, and a now trial granted, with costs to abide the event, upon authority of Happel v. Lehigh Valley Railroad Co. (210 App. Div. 461) and O’Connor v. Webber (239 N. Y. 191). Kelly, P. J., Rich, Jaycox and Young, JJ., concur, Kelby, J., dissents on the ground that the situation presented in the .case at bar is different from the Happel ease.

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

Sirota v. Shacknovitz, 212 A.D. 884 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

212 A.D. 884 (Sirota v. Shacknovitz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

O'Connor v. Webber
146 N.E. 200 (New York Court of Appeals, 1924)
Happel v. Lehigh Valley Railroad
210 A.D. 461 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1924)