← Cases

Galvin v. Coxe Bros.

125 A.D. 904 Court N.Y. App. Div. English

Contents

Majority

p. 904
Thomas M. Galvin, by Guardian, etc., Appellant, v. Coxe Brothers & Co., Respondent. D. Bradley Sweet, Appellant, v. Fannie O. Sweet, Individually, etc., Respondent. Elizabeth Sink, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent. Wilhelmina Kurt, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. Lake Shore and Michigan Southern Railroad Company, Appellant. Rita Lidsky, as Administratrix, etc., Respondent, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Appellant. The Cataract Power and Conduit Company, Plaintiff, v. City of Buffalo, Defendant. Mary D. Rising, Appellant, v. James O. Sebring and Others Respondents. Jacob Dilcher, Respondent, v. Michael Nellany, Appellant. Elva A. Turner, Appellant, v. M. W. Burge and Another, Respondents. Samuel Nease, Appellant, v. New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent. Harriet E. Winans, Appellant, v. Rochester Railway Company, Respondent. Rose C. Seager, as Administratrix, etc,, Appellant, v. The Solvay Process
p. 905
Company, Respondent. Charles E. Morse, Respondent, v. Charles E. Swanson and Others, Appellants. John Lux, Appellant, v. Theophil Senger, Respondent. Elizabeth J. Campbell, Appellant, v. Louis Black, Respondent. Michael Conroy, Respondent, v. Cleveland, Cincinnati and St. Louis Railway Company, Appellant.

The foregoing cases having been called and twice passed, the said appeals are in each case dismissed under rule 39 of the General Rules of Practice.