Case Name: SHIEBLER, Appellant, v. SUFFOLK GAS & ELECTRIC LIGHT CO., Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1913-02-14
Citations: 140 N.Y.S. 1145
Docket Number: 
Parties: SHIEBLER, Appellant, v. SUFFOLK GAS & ELECTRIC LIGHT CO., Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 140
Pages: 1145–1145

Head Matter:
SHIEBLER, Appellant, v. SUFFOLK GAS & ELECTRIC LIGHT CO., Respondent.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.
February 14, 1913.)
Action by Marvin Shiebler against the Suffolk Gas & Electric Light Company.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Prior to the amendment of the calendar rules on October 18, 1912, under authority of Sprague v. Tangier Development Co., 152 App. Div. 921, 137 N. Y. Supp. 745, we think that plaintiff was entitled to the preference asked for. Order reversed, and motion for a preference granted; but, in view of the unsettled state of the law at the time that the application was made, such reversal should be without costs.
HIRSCHBERG, J., dissents.