From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

O'Connor v. Hudson River Day Line

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 23, 1946
68 N.E.2d 450 (N.Y. 1946)

Opinion

Argued May 27, 1946

Decided July 23, 1946

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, FENNELLY, J.

Arthur N. Seiff, Moses Smith and Emanuel Redfield for appellant.

Donald Havens and David L. Corbin for respondent.


Judgment affirmed, with costs, upon the ground that there was no evidence to support the jury's finding that plaintiff's efforts were the procuring cause of the requisitioning of defendant's vessel. We decide no other question. No opinion.

Concur: LOUGHRAN, Ch. J., LEWIS, CONWAY, DESMOND, THACHER and FULD, JJ. Taking no part: DYE, J.


Summaries of

O'Connor v. Hudson River Day Line

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 23, 1946
68 N.E.2d 450 (N.Y. 1946)
Case details for

O'Connor v. Hudson River Day Line

Case Details

Full title:JOHN O'CONNOR, Appellant, v. HUDSON RIVER DAY LINE, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 23, 1946

Citations

68 N.E.2d 450 (N.Y. 1946)
68 N.E.2d 450

Citing Cases

Hazeltine Research, Inc. v. De Wald Radio Mfg. Corp.

Illegality renders an agreement unenforcible ( Matter of Abbey [ Meyersen], 274 A.D. 389). An agreement which…

Federal Pacific Elec. Co. v. McAdams

"If, as must be conceded, the national government has power to protect itself against contracts of the kind…