Snell v. Niagara Paper Mills

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Snell v. Niagara Paper Mills

126 A.D. 921

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

DecidedMay 15, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 126 A.D. 921 (Snell v. Niagara Paper Mills) 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

Snell v. Niagara Paper Mills, 126 A.D. 921 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Held, that as the cause of action set forth in the complaint was not referable and was denied by the answer and the long account was contained in the counterclaim, the Special Term had no authority to grant the order of reference. (Steck v. Colorado Fuel & Iron Co., 142 N. Y. 236.) All concurred, except McLennan, P. J., and Williams, J., who dissented on the authority of Irving v. Irving (90 Hun, 423; affd., 149 N. Y. 573.)

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

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Held, that as the cause of action set forth in the complaint was not referable and was denied by the answer and the long account was contained in the counterclaim, the Special Term had no authority to grant the order of reference. (Steck v. Colorado Fuel & Iron Co., 142 N. Y. 236.) All concurred, except McLennan, P. J., and Williams, J., who dissented on the authority of Irving v. Irving (90 Hun, 423; affd., 149 N. Y. 573.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D. 921, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/snell-v-niagara-paper-mills-nyappdiv-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack