Opinion · Nylaw New York

RUSSO v. BIRDSALL, 266 App. Div. 794 (1943)

JOSEPH RUSSO, Respondent, v. FRANKLIN T. BIRDSALL et al., Individually andas Copartners under the Name of BIRDSALL HESS, Appellants., 266 A.D. 794 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department. 1943)

Type: Opinion
Court: Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction: Nylaw
Date: 1943-05-17
Topic: general

RUSSO v. BIRDSALL, 266 App. Div. 794 (1943) JOSEPH RUSSO, Respondent, v. FRANKLIN T. BIRDSALL et al., Individually andas Copartners under the Name of BIRDSALL HESS, Appellants.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed RUSSO v. BIRDSALL, 266 App. Div. 794 (1943). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

RUSSO v. BIRDSALL,266 App. Div. 794(1943)

JOSEPH RUSSO, Respondent, v. FRANKLIN T. BIRDSALL et al., Individually and

as Copartners under the Name of BIRDSALL HESS, Appellants.

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

May 17, 1943.

Action to recover damages for breach of contract in connection with orders to carry out certain purchases and sales of securities. Judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and order denying defendants' motion to set the verdict aside, unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion.

Present — Close, P.J., Hagarty, Carswell, Johnston and Taylor, JJ.