William C. Culliton, Inc. v. Grinnell Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

William C. Culliton, Inc. v. Grinnell Co.

259 A.D. 983, 20 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7532

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

DecidedMay 29, 1940

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D. 983 (William C. Culliton, Inc. v. Grinnell Co.) 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

William C. Culliton, Inc. v. Grinnell Co., 259 A.D. 983, 20 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7532 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgments and order affirmed, with costs. All concur, except Taylor, J., who concurs in the affirmance of the judgment entered May tenth, but dissents and votes for reversal on the law of the judgment entered May ninth and for granting a new trial as to the defendant Grinnell Co. on the ground that there was error in excluding the specifications from the consideration of the jury. (The judgment entered May 9, 1939, is for plaintiff against defendant Grinnell Company, Inc., in an action to recover for work performed. The judgment entered Slay 10, 1939, dismisses the claim of defendant Grinnell Company, Inc., against defendant Bryant & Detwiler Co., Inc. The order denies motions of defendant Grinnell Company, Inc., for a new trial, and to set aside order on minutes dismissing its cross-claim.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and McCurn, JJ.

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

Judgments and order affirmed, with costs. All concur, except Taylor, J., who concurs in the affirmance of the judgment entered May tenth, but dissents and votes for reversal on the law of the judgment entered May ninth and for granting a new trial as to the defendant Grinnell Co. on the ground that there was error in excluding the specifications from the consideration of the jury. (The judgment entered May 9, 1939, is for plaintiff against defendant Grinnell Company, Inc., in an action to recover for work performed. The judgment entered Slay 10, 1939, dismisses the claim of defendant Grinnell Company, Inc., against defendant Bryant & Detwiler Co., Inc. The order denies motions of defendant Grinnell Company, Inc., for a new trial, and to set aside order on minutes dismissing its cross-claim.) Present — Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Dowling and McCurn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D. 983, 20 N.Y.S.2d 1021, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7532, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/william-c-culliton-inc-v-grinnell-co-nyappdiv-1940.