History
  • No items yet
midpage
Peters v. Knott Corp.
191 Misc. 898
N.Y. App. Term.
1948
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

The checking facilities maintained by defendant, as disclosed by this record, did not constitute a checkroom within the meaning of section 201 of the General Business Law. Even if it were a checkroom, the evidence presented a question of fact as to whether the notice specified in section 206 had been properly posted by defendant.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with costs to plaintiff to abide the event.

MacCrate, Fennelly and Golden, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Case Details

Case Name: Peters v. Knott Corp.
Court Name: Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Date Published: May 26, 1948
Citation: 191 Misc. 898
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Term.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.