Opinion
Argued March 5, 1894
Decided March 20, 1894
William C. Lamont for appellant. G.M. Palmer for respondent.
Agree to affirm on opinion below.
66 Hun, 205.
All concur, except EARL, J., not voting.
Judgment affirmed.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
The Howe's Cave Association v. Houck
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 20, 1894
141 N.Y. 606 (N.Y. 1894)
Summaries of
The Howe's Cave Association v. Houck
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Mar 20, 1894
141 N.Y. 606 (N.Y. 1894)
Case details for
The Howe's Cave Association v. Houck
Case Details
Full title:THE HOWE'S CAVE ASSOCIATION, Appellant, v . PETER HOUCK, Respondent
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Mar 20, 1894
Citations
141 N.Y. 606 (N.Y. 1894)
58 N.Y. St. Rptr. 866
Citing Cases
Haskins v. Kelly
( Andrews v. Day Button Co., 132 N.Y. 348; Agate v. Lowenbein, 57 N.Y. 604; Bedlow v. N.Y. Floating Dry Dock…
Chicago Title Trust Co. v. Fox Theatres Corp.Penton v. Robart, 2 East 88 (Court of Kings Bench, Nov. 23, 1801); Hallen v. Runder, 1 Cr.M. R. 266 (Exch. of…