Case Name: Rosa Meinke, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant; Henry Meinke, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant; William Hopbach, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1933-05
Citations: 239 A.D. 847
Docket Number: 
Parties: Rosa Meinke, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant. Henry Meinke, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant. William Hopbach, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 239
Pages: 847–847

Head Matter:
Rosa Meinke, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant. Henry Meinke, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant. William Hopbach, Respondent, v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Company and Another, Defendants, Impleaded with International Harvester Company of America, Sued Herein as International Harvester Company, Appellant.

Opinion:
Orders denying motions to amend papers affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.