Etzkorn v. Levy

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Etzkorn v. Levy

159 N.Y.S. 801

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 26, 1916

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 159 N.Y.S. 801 (Etzkorn v. Levy) 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

Etzkorn v. Levy, 159 N.Y.S. 801 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

Plaintiff sues for four weeks’ wages as a carpenter, at $50 a week, under an engagement for at least four weeks. He was employed by the defendant Lederer, who was not served with process. It appeared that the three defendants had engaged in a certain joint venture, and that in the agreement between them it was provided that “all contracts involving an expenditure of more than $100 shall be signed by all three parties.” The plaintiff was employed by defendant Lederer in person, and at the time of such employment plaintiff conceded that he was not aware of the joint venture, or of any interest of the appellant therein. It is evident, therefore, that there was no holding out by the defendant Levy of the defendant Lederer as agent in any respect. Plaintiff was therefore bound by the terms and limitations of Lederer’s authority. Under the circumstances the agreement made by Lederer was one to which he could not bind the defendant.

Judgment reversed, with $30 costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs. All concur.

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

BIJUR, J.

Plaintiff sues for four weeks’ wages as a carpenter, at $50 a week, under an engagement for at least four weeks. He was employed by the defendant Lederer, who was not served with process. It appeared that the three defendants had engaged in a certain joint venture, and that in the agreement between them it was provided that “all contracts involving an expenditure of more than $100 shall be signed by all three parties.” The plaintiff was employed by defendant Lederer in person, and at the time of such employment plaintiff conceded that he was not aware of the joint venture, or of any interest of the appellant therein. It is evident, therefore, that there was no holding out by the defendant Levy of the defendant Lederer as agent in any respect. Plaintiff was therefore bound by the terms and limitations of Lederer’s authority. Under the circumstances the agreement made by Lederer was one to which he could not bind the defendant.

Judgment reversed, with $30 costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 N.Y.S. 801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/etzkorn-v-levy-nyappterm-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack