Freeman v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Freeman v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America

36 Misc. 764, 74 N.Y.S. 1128

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedOctober 15, 1901

StatusPublished

This text of 36 Misc. 764 (Freeman v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America) 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

Freeman v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, 36 Misc. 764, 74 N.Y.S. 1128 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1901).

Pincite

Opinion

Freedman, P. J.

This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover for three weeks and two days’ salary at an agreed price of three dollars per week, and the sum of seventeen dollars and twenty-five cents commissions, claiméd by the plaintiff to have been earned by him as an insurance agent while employed by the defendant, less the sum of six dollars, paid for two weeks’ salary. The facts are substantially undisputed as to the hiring and agreement as to amount of the commissions to be paid. But the defendant claimed that the commissions were not to be paid to the plaintiff until a period of thirteen weeks had elapsed from the date of each policy written by or through the plaintiff’s solicitation. The agreement between the parties was in writing, but was silent upon this question, and each parly gave parol evidence in conflict upon that point. Upon that issue the trial court found against the defendant, and gave judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The record discloses no ground for reversal.

McAdam and Gildersleeve, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Freedman, P. J.

This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover for three weeks and two days’ salary at an agreed price of three dollars per week, and the sum of seventeen dollars and twenty-five cents commissions, claiméd by the plaintiff to have been earned by him as an insurance agent while employed by the defendant, less the sum of six dollars, paid for two weeks’ salary. The facts are substantially undisputed as to the hiring and agreement as to amount of the commissions to be paid. But the defendant claimed that the commissions were not to be paid to the plaintiff until a period of thirteen weeks had elapsed from the date of each policy written by or through the plaintiff’s solicitation. The agreement between the parties was in writing, but was silent upon this question, and each parly gave parol evidence in conflict upon that point. Upon that issue the trial court found against the defendant, and gave judgment in favor of the plaintiff. The record discloses no ground for reversal.

McAdam and Gildersleeve, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

36 Misc. 764, 74 N.Y.S. 1128, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/freeman-v-prudential-insurance-co-of-america-nyappterm-1901.