Legal Opinion
In re the Final Accounting of Fitzgerald
New York Supreme Court
Decided November 15, 1896PublishedCited by 4 opinions
Motion' for final accounting.
1Opinion of the CourtForbes, J.
This is a motion for the final- accounting of the receivers in the above-entitled action. The only question about which there is any dispute arises upon the application of Frank P. Marshal], the assignee of a claim made by A. P. Marshall as a traveling salesman of the Cortland Manufacturing Company, Limited, under a contract of employment by the year.
The terms of that contract arose-from an. offer made on the part of the Cortland Manufacturing Company, Limited, to A. P. Marshall, dated October 17, 1892,- and is in form as follows:
“ Mr. A. P. Marshall, Lancaster, FT. H.:
"Dea'.* Sir.— We will…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Gurney v. Atlantic & Great Western Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1874
- Wakefield v. . FargoNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Metropolitan Trust Co. v. Tonawanda Valley & Cuba RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Johnston v. BarrillsOregon Supreme Court · 1895
- Richardson v. . ThurberNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hurley v. SykesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
- State Ex Rel. Gorczyca v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928
- United States v. SchlierholzDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1905
- Mullen v. Clark CountyNevada Supreme Court · 1973