Opinion · Nylaw New York

MATTER OF BOSDYCK v. ROCHESTER FOLDING BOX COMPANY, 271 N.Y. 660 (1936)

3 N.E.2d 472

Type
Opinion
Court
Nylaw New York
Jurisdiction
Nylaw
Date
1936-06-05
Topic
general

MATTER OF BOSDYCK v. ROCHESTER FOLDING BOX COMPANY, 271 N.Y. 660 (1936) 3 N.E.2d 472 In the Matter of the Claim of ROBERT BOSDYCK, Respondent, against ROCHESTERFOLDING BOX COMPANY et al., Appellants.STATE INDUSTRIAL BOARD, Respondent.Court of Appeals of the State of New York.Submitted June 1, 1936 Decided June 5, 1936 Motion to amend remittitur denied. In its present form the remittitur awarded one bill of costs to be divided equally between the claimant and the State Industrial Board; each respondent, however, being entitled to tax disbursements. (See 271 N.Y. 549.)

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed MATTER OF BOSDYCK v. ROCHESTER FOLDING BOX COMPANY, 271 N.Y. 660 (1936). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

MATTER OF BOSDYCK v. ROCHESTER FOLDING BOX COMPANY,271 N.Y. 660(1936)
3 N.E.2d 472
In the Matter of the Claim of ROBERT BOSDYCK, Respondent, against ROCHESTER
FOLDING BOX COMPANY et al., Appellants.
STATE INDUSTRIAL BOARD, Respondent.
Court of Appeals of the State of New York.
Submitted June 1, 1936
Decided June 5, 1936
Motion to amend remittitur denied. In its present form the remittitur awarded one bill of costs to be divided equally between the claimant and the State Industrial Board; each respondent, however, being entitled to tax disbursements. (See271 N.Y. 549.)