Anderson v. Nagel

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING. OPINION FILED FEBRUARY 23, 1924.

Respondent's counsel insistently urges upon our attention a number of cases not cited in his original brief. These cases had not escaped our attention. They are, we think, clearly distinguishable on their facts from the case at bar. If, however, they may be regarded as supporting counsel's view, they are out of accord with the decisions in this State and the great weight of authority elsewhere. Counsel especially presses upon our attention Riley v. Standard Oil Co., 231 N.Y. 301, which on its facts is more nearly on all fours with the…