General
Edmund W. Hathaway, Respondent, v. James P. Graham, Appellant, Impleaded with Charles D. Smith and Others, Respondents
145 A.D. 937·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1911·NY
Jenks, P. J., Woodward and Rich, JJ., concurred.
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
Edmund W. Hathaway, Respondent, v. James P. Graham, Appellant, Impleaded with Charles D. Smith and Others, Respondents.
[MAJORITY]
We think that the obligation imposed upon the plaintiff and the defendant Titcomb^ should be enlarged so as to require them to respond to the partnership. The judgment should be modified in t as so modified affirmed, without costs.
Jenks, P. J., Woodward and Rich, JJ., concurred.