General
Adolph Goldmark, Respondent, v. The Magnolia Anti-Friction Metal Company, Appellant, Impleaded with Another
172 N.Y. 645·New York Court of Appeals·1902·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Adolph Goldmark, Respondent, v. The Magnolia Anti-Friction Metal Company, Appellant, Impleaded with Another.
Reported below, 71 App. Div. 617.
(Submitted November 10, 1902;
decided November 18, 1902.)
Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 15, 1902, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial.
The motion was made upon the grounds that the exceptions are frivolous and the appeal taken for delay.
L. A. Gould for motion.
Alexander S. Bacon opposed.
[MAJORITY]
Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.