Legal Opinion

Klein v. Betzold

New York Supreme Court

Decided November 15, 1922PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGavegan, J.

Section 213 of the Civil Practice Act does not warrant joinder of defendants as attempted here. The action is to recover for damage to and loss of personal property. Plaintiff had one defendant dress 4,000 pieces of fur. After said defendant returned them, plaintiff sent 2,147 of them to the other defendant *506for dyeing. It is alleged that they were improperly dyed and improperly dressed and “ that as a result of either the dressing or dyeing, or both, the said skins have been ” damaged, and that 25 of them were never received back from the dyer. With each. defendant plaintiff dealt separately.…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Snavely v. City of GoldendaleWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Busset v. California Builders Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932
  3. San Francisco M. Co. Ltd. v. MordecaiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
  4. Freund Coat Corp. v. LipschutzCity of New York Municipal Court · 1929

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API