Case Name: Charles Pfeil, Appellant, v. August C. Hasselbush and Edward C. Tinker, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1937-01-08
Citations: 249 A.D. 817
Docket Number: 
Parties: Charles Pfeil, Appellant, v. August C. Hasselbush and Edward C. Tinker, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 249
Pages: 817–817

Head Matter:
Charles Pfeil, Appellant, v. August C. Hasselbush and Edward C. Tinker, Respondents.

Opinion:
Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals granted. [See ante, p. 766.] The following question is certified: Do the facts set forth in the second paragraph of the amended answer constitute a defense to the cause of action set forth in the complaint? Present — Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston and Adel, JJ.; Close, J., not voting.