Opinion · Nylaw New York

LENIHAN v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS RAILROAD COMPANY, 186 App. Div. 958 (1918)

MARY E. LENIHAN, as Adm’r, Adm’x, etc., of HARRY LENIHAN, Deceased,Respondent, v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS R.R. Co., Appellant., 186 A.D. 958 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. 1918)

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1918-01-01
Topic: general

LENIHAN v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS RAILROAD COMPANY, 186 App. Div. 958 (1918) MARY E. LENIHAN, as Administratrix, etc., of HARRY LENIHAN, Deceased,Respondent, v. THE BROOKLYN HEIGHTS RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed LENIHAN v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS RAILROAD COMPANY, 186 App. Div. 958 (1918). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

LENIHAN v. BROOKLYN HEIGHTS RAILROAD COMPANY,186 App. Div. 958(1918)

MARY E. LENIHAN, as Administratrix, etc., of HARRY LENIHAN, Deceased,

Respondent, v. THE BROOKLYN HEIGHTS RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellant.

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

December, 1918.

Motion for reargument denied, without costs.

Present — Jenks, P.J., Mills, Rich, Kelly and Jaycox, JJ.