Wood v. . Wise
102 N.E. 1117, 208 N.Y. 586, 1913 N.Y. LEXIS 1182
Opinion
*588 Order affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Woodward, J., below. First question certified answered in the affirmative; second question not answered; third and fourth questions answered in the negative; fifth question answered, a new trial should not have been granted.
Concur: Cullen, Oh. J., Werner, Hiscock, Collin, Cuddebaok and Miller. Absent: Gray, J.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Wood v. . Wise, 102 N.E. 1117, 208 N.Y. 586, 1913 N.Y. LEXIS 1182 (N.Y. 1913).
102 N.E. 1117 (Wood v. . Wise) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
150 Central Park South, Inc. v. Ritz Carlton Valet Service, Inc.
276 A.D.2d 214 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1949)
Collins v. Widger
231 A.D. 321 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1931)