McClelland v. Climax Hosiery Mills

New York Court of Appeals · Decided 1930-01-07

Cited by 138 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Cabdozo, Ch. J. (concurring). I agree with Judge Hubbs that the testimony as to other employment was too vague and indefinite to disprove the prima facie case of damage made out by the plaintiff. I agree with him also that Civil Practice Act, section 262, like Civil Practice Act, section 339, is inapplicable to a c…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.