Peters v. Knott Corp.
Virginia F. Peters v. Knott Corp.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Per Curiam.
The checking facilities maintained by defendant, as disclosed by this record, did not constitute a checkroom within the meaning of section 201 of the General Business Law. Even if it were a checkroom, the evidence presented a question of fact as to whether the notice specified in section 206 had been properly posted by defendant.
The judgment should be unanimously reversed upon the law and new trial granted, with costs to plaintiff to abide the event.
MacCrate, Fennelly and Golden, JJ., concur.
Judgment reversed, etc.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.