Opinion · Nylaw New York

BURKE v. LONDON GUARANTEE AND ACCIDENT COMPANY, 126 App. Div. 933 (1908)

Mary Burke, an Infant, by George J. O'Keefe, Her Guardian ad Litem,Appellant, v. London Guarantee & Accident Co., Respondent., 126 A.D. 933 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. 1908)

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1908-01-01
Topic: general

BURKE v. LONDON GUARANTEE AND ACCIDENT COMPANY, 126 App. Div. 933 (1908) Mary Burke, an Infant, by George J. O'Keefe, Her Guardian ad Litem,Appellant, v. The London Guarantee and Accident Company, Respondent.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed BURKE v. LONDON GUARANTEE AND ACCIDENT COMPANY, 126 App. Div. 933 (1908). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

BURKE v. LONDON GUARANTEE AND ACCIDENT COMPANY,126 App. Div. 933(1908)

Mary Burke, an Infant, by George J. O'Keefe, Her Guardian ad Litem,

Appellant, v. The London Guarantee and Accident Company, Respondent.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

May, 1908.

Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Mr. Justice Gaynor at Special Term. (Reported in47 Misc. Rep. 171.) Woodward, Jenks, Hooker and Rich, JJ., concurred.