Spink v. . Corning
65 N.E. 1122, 172 N.Y. 626, 1902 N.Y. LEXIS 751
Opinion
Judgment affirmed, but as the court think the damages in this case are excessive and as this court cannot reverse on that *627 account or reduce the damages, the affirmance is without costs; no opinion.
Concur: Parker, Ch. J., Gray, Bartlett, Haight, Mártir and Culler, JJ. Not voting : Werrer, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Spink v. . Corning, 65 N.E. 1122, 172 N.Y. 626, 1902 N.Y. LEXIS 751 (N.Y. 1902).
65 N.E. 1122 (Spink v. . Corning) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Zidel v. State
198 Misc. 91 (New York State Court of Claims, 1949)
In re Taxpayers of the Twenty-Third Ward
136 Misc. 278 (New York Supreme Court, 1930)
Olney v. Culluloo Park Co.
182 A.D. 560 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1918)
Hentz v. City of Mount Vernon
78 A.D. 515 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)