From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gerstein v. Fisher

New York Superior Court — General Term
Oct 1, 1895
14 Misc. 644 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)

Opinion

October, 1895.

Oscar H. Bogart ( Hiram Ketchum, of counsel), for appellant.

Louis Steckler, for respondent.


The order appealed from should be affirmed on the opinion filed by the learned judge below. In view of the decisions in Collins v. Hydorn, 135 N.Y. 320, and Furlong v. Banta, 80 Hun, 248, the case of Anderson v. Third Ave. R.R. Co., 9 Daly, 487, cannot be followed, and the decision of Featherson v. Newburgh C. Turnpike Co., 24 N.Y.S. 603, has no application.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

Present: FREEDMAN and McADAM, JJ.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.


Summaries of

Gerstein v. Fisher

New York Superior Court — General Term
Oct 1, 1895
14 Misc. 644 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)
Case details for

Gerstein v. Fisher

Case Details

Full title:ISRAEL GERSTEIN, Respondent, v . ROBERT W. FISHER, Appellant

Court:New York Superior Court — General Term

Date published: Oct 1, 1895

Citations

14 Misc. 644 (N.Y. Misc. 1895)

Citing Cases

MATTER OF MARCOMO STEVEDORING CORP. v. Nathanson

In the Municipal Court action the wage assignee sued the employer Marcomo Stevedoring Corporation but the…

Matter of Marcomo Stevedoring Corp. v. Nathanson

In the Municipal Court action the wage assignee sued the employer Marcomo Stevedoring Corporation but the…