D'Angelo v. Cipolla

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

D'Angelo v. Cipolla

148 N.Y.S. 1111

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 18, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 148 N.Y.S. 1111 (D'Angelo v. Cipolla) 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

D'Angelo v. Cipolla, 148 N.Y.S. 1111 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The testimony in this case is wholly insufficient to charge the defendant Cipolla with liability. There is no competent evidence that Bernhardt and Cipplla were partners in the hiring of the tools and machinery, or even partners at the time of such hiring. As to whether or not Bernhardt hired the' material was a question of fact, upon which there was a dispute, and the finding of the lower court should not be disturbed. Judgment as to defendant Bernhardt affirmed, with costs. Judgment as to defendant Cipolla reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

The testimony in this case is wholly insufficient to charge the defendant Cipolla with liability. There is no competent evidence that Bernhardt and Cipplla were partners in the hiring of the tools and machinery, or even partners at the time of such hiring. As to whether or not Bernhardt hired the' material was a question of fact, upon which there was a dispute, and the finding of the lower court should not be disturbed. Judgment as to defendant Bernhardt affirmed, with costs. Judgment as to defendant Cipolla reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 N.Y.S. 1111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dangelo-v-cipolla-nyappterm-1914.