Plumb v. Richmond Light & Railroad ( 1920 )

Reargument ordered upon the question as to whether or not the judge’s charge at folios 493 and 494 of the case correctly stated the law, with reference to the exception taken thereto by defendant’s counsel at folios 517 and 518, and ease set down for the January' term of 1921. Jenks, P. J., Rich, Putnam, Blackmar and Kelly, JJ., concur. [See 195 App. Div. -.]