Brower v. New York Mailing & Advertising Co.

48 Misc. 653
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brower v. New York Mailing & Advertising Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 92 N.Y.S. 61
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided July 1, 1905·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Referring to the determination of this court on a former appeal herein (92 N. Y. Supp. 61), it was said that “the plaintiffs offered no explanation of these letters, and they clearly contradict the plaintiffs’ testimony.” For aught that appears, the same is true on this appeal; for charges in the books of Hindle & Co., and payment by the plaintiffs of the disputed indebtedness, as well as evidence of time by artisans, may hardly be construed as at all explanatory of the positive statements of the plaintiffs, particularly so late as in their letter of April 13, 1904, denying their liability and, so, their agreement with the defendant, notwithstanding they pleaded and testified orally to the contrary.

Scott, J., concurs; Gilderslebve, J., taking no part.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered with costs to appellant to abide event.

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

Brower v. New York Mailing & Advertising Co., 48 Misc. 653 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

48 Misc. 653 (Brower v. New York Mailing & Advertising Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brower v. New York Mailing & Advertising Co.
92 N.Y.S. 61 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1905)