In Perry v. Council Bluffs Water-Works Co., 67 Hun. 458, the court said: "The questions presented for review are, whether the defendant corporation is liable upon the note, and, if liable, to what extent?
Summary of this case from Martin v. St. Aloysius ChurchArgued June 14, 1894
Decided June 22, 1894
James L. Bishop for appellant.
George B. Ashley for respondent.
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
All concur.
Judgment affirmed.
In Perry v. Council Bluffs Water-Works Co., 67 Hun. 458, the court said: "The questions presented for review are, whether the defendant corporation is liable upon the note, and, if liable, to what extent?
Summary of this case from Martin v. St. Aloysius ChurchIn Perry v. Council Bluffs Water-Works Co., 67 Hun. 456, unanimously affirmed by the Court of Appeals "on opinion below" in 143 N.Y. 637, the court observes that "It would serve no useful purpose to traverse the grounds so carefully gone over by the learned referee, it being sufficient on this branch of the case to say that we concur in his reasoning, and in the conclusion reached.
Summary of this case from Eliot National Bank v. Woonsocket Electric Machine & Power Co.Full title:MARSDEN J. PERRY, Respondent, v . COUNCIL BLUFFS CITY WATER WORKS COMPANY…
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Jun 22, 1894
While in the normal course the implied authority vested in an actively functioning president will not devolve…
Martin v. St. Aloysius Church" In Perry v. Council Bluffs Water-Works Co., 67 Hun. 458, the court said: "The questions presented for…