Burrows v. New York Breweries Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Burrows v. New York Breweries Co.

119 N.Y.S. 196

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 12, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 119 N.Y.S. 196 (Burrows v. New York Breweries Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Burrows v. New York Breweries Co., 119 N.Y.S. 196 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

No evidence was introduced by the defendant. Plaintiff showed that she, as owner, leased certain premises to one Clara Ihle; that, in consideration of such letting to said Ihle, a guaranty of the performance of all conditions of the lease by said Clara Ihle was made in writing and signed by “Flanagan, Nay & Co., by P. G. Tighe, Manager”; and that among those conditions of the lease was the payment of the water tax, and she produced a nonreceipted bill for the water tax. The court gave judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

No evidence connecting Flanagan, Nay & Co. with defendant was introduced, nor is there any evidence of the nonpayment of the water tax, beyond the nonreceipted bill and plaintiff’s assertion that, so far as she knows, it has not been paid, without any proof of the improbability, or even unlikelihood, of its being paid, without her knowledge, since the time of the receipt by her of the said bill. The evidence is insufficient to support the judgment, which must be reversed.

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

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

PER CURIAM.

No evidence was introduced by the defendant. Plaintiff showed that she, as owner, leased certain premises to one Clara Ihle; that, in consideration of such letting to said Ihle, a guaranty of the performance of all conditions of the lease by said Clara Ihle was made in writing and signed by “Flanagan, Nay & Co., by P. G. Tighe, Manager”; and that among those conditions of the lease was the payment of the water tax, and she produced a nonreceipted bill for the water tax. The court gave judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

No evidence connecting Flanagan, Nay & Co. with defendant was introduced, nor is there any evidence of the nonpayment of the water tax, beyond the nonreceipted bill and plaintiff’s assertion that, so far as she knows, it has not been paid, without any proof of the improbability, or even unlikelihood, of its being paid, without her knowledge, since the time of the receipt by her of the said bill. The evidence is insufficient to support the judgment, which must be reversed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 N.Y.S. 196, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burrows-v-new-york-breweries-co-nyappterm-1909.