Barreau v. Hutchinson

New York Court of Common Pleas

Barreau v. Hutchinson

21 N.Y.S. 1128, 2 Misc. 577, 49 N.Y. St. Rep. 921

New York Court of Common Pleas·Decided January 3, 1893·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The vice of appellant’s contention is that it assumes the letter of September 10th, addressed by defendant’s wife to plaintiff, to be an unequivocal and absolute repudiation of the contract of employment, whereas the justice below apparently construed it to have been no more than a proposition that plaintiff consent to a modification of the terms of the contract theretofore made, and as, in our opinion, the letter is susceptible of the latter construction, it necessarily follows that appellant has not sustained the burden of showing error for which the judgment appealed from must be reversed. Motion for reargu’ment denied, with $ 10 costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The vice of appellant’s contention is that it assumes the letter of September 10th, addressed by defendant’s wife to plaintiff, to be an unequivocal and absolute repudiation of the contract of employment, whereas the justice below apparently construed it to have been no more than a proposition that plaintiff consent to a modification of the terms of the contract theretofore made, and as, in our opinion, the letter is susceptible of the latter construction, it necessarily follows that appellant has not sustained the burden of showing error for which the judgment appealed from must be reversed. Motion for reargu’ment denied, with $ 10 costs.

Barreau v. Hutchinson, 21 N.Y.S. 1128, 2 Misc. 577, 49 N.Y. St. Rep. 921 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

21 N.Y.S. 1128 (Barreau v. Hutchinson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.