Case Name: William M. Hoes, App'lt, v. Thomas Hume, Resp't
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1896-05-01
Citations: 72 N.Y. St. Rep. 868
Docket Number: 
Parties: William M. Hoes, App’lt, v. Thomas Hume, Resp’t.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 72
Pages: 868–869

Head Matter:
William M. Hoes, App’lt, v. Thomas Hume, Resp’t.
Sup. Ct., App. D., 1 D.,
May 1, 1896.
J. W. Boothby, for app’lt; R. E. Deyo, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
—The rule laid down upon the previous appeal (Stebbins v. Hume 1 N. Y. Supp. 131) is the law of this case, so far as this' court is concerned. The trial judge ruled in accordance with the views there laid down by the general term. We should therefore affirm his action. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.