History
  • No items yet
midpage
Ward v. Edesheimer
17 N.Y.S. 173
New York Court of Common Pleas
1892
Check Treatment
Per Curiam.

The questions involved in this action were purely questions of law. There was no substantial conflict in the evidence. We think that the court below has very clearly and succintly stated the law applicable to the facts in this case, and that the judgment should be affirmed on his opinion.

Case Details

Case Name: Ward v. Edesheimer
Court Name: New York Court of Common Pleas
Date Published: Jan 4, 1892
Citation: 17 N.Y.S. 173
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.