Slattery v. Kerbstone Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Slattery v. Kerbstone Realty Corp.

198 A.D. 945

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 15, 1921

StatusPublished

This text of 198 A.D. 945 (Slattery v. Kerbstone Realty Corp.) 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

Slattery v. Kerbstone Realty Corp., 198 A.D. 945 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Rich and Jaycox, JJ., concur; Putnam, J., concurs on the ground that the question of a nuisance was a matter for the jury, and the verdict was sustained by the effort to cover the spindle with a box before the accident; Kelly, J., dissents on the ground that the facts did not justify the finding that the spindle in question constituted a nuisance (MacRae v. Chelsea Fibre Mills, 145 App. Div. 588), with whom Blaekmar, P. J., concurs.

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

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Rich and Jaycox, JJ., concur; Putnam, J., concurs on the ground that the question of a nuisance was a matter for the jury, and the verdict was sustained by the effort to cover the spindle with a box before the accident; Kelly, J., dissents on the ground that the facts did not justify the finding that the spindle in question constituted a nuisance (MacRae v. Chelsea Fibre Mills, 145 App. Div. 588), with whom Blaekmar, P. J., concurs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 A.D. 945, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/slattery-v-kerbstone-realty-corp-nyappdiv-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack