Case ID: ny_199/html/0568-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Bertha Schiefer, Appellant, v. Minna Freygang, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of Oscar C. Freygang, Deceased, et al., Defendants, and The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company et al., Respondents.
    
      Schiefer v. Freygang, 125 App. Div. 498, affirmed.
    (Argued September 28, 1910;
    decided October 18, 1910.)
    Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 22, 1908, which reversed an interlocutory judgment of Special Term sustaining a demurrer to the answer and overruled such demurrer.
    The following questions were certified :
    
      “ 1. Is the fifth separate defense contained in the answer herein of the defendants, The New York and Harlem Railroad Company and The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, sufficient in law upon the face thereof ?
    
      “2. Does the complaint herein state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action as against the defendants The New York and Harlem Railroad Company and The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company ? ”
    
      L. M. BerTi.eley for apjiellant.
    
      Robert A. Kutsehboel;, Alex. 8. Lyman and Lra A. Place for respondents.
   Order affirmed, with costs, and second question certified answered in the negative; first question not answered; no opinion.

' Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Haight, Vann, Werner,Willard Bartlett, IIiscock and Chase, JJ.