German American Metal & Novelty Works, Inc. v. Shubert-Anderson Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

German American Metal & Novelty Works, Inc. v. Shubert-Anderson Co.

124 A.D. 912, 108 N.Y.S. 1133

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 15, 1908·Published

Opinion

Judgment and order of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Jenks, Gaynor and Miller, JJ., concurred; Hooker and Rich, JJ., dissented on the following ground: The allegation of the' authority of the defendant’s.agent McBride is denied by the answer; there is no claim he had actual authority, and the proof of his ostensible' authority is merely that he was called general manag.er and had an office in defendant’s building. This is insufficient. (Camacho v. Hamilton Bank Note & Eng. Co., 2 App. Div. 369, 371.)

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

Judgment and order of the Municipal Court affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Jenks, Gaynor and Miller, JJ., concurred; Hooker and Rich, JJ., dissented on the following ground: The allegation of the' authority of the defendant’s.agent McBride is denied by the answer; there is no claim he had actual authority, and the proof of his ostensible' authority is merely that he was called general manag.er and had an office in defendant’s building. This is insufficient. (Camacho v. Hamilton Bank Note & Eng. Co., 2 App. Div. 369, 371.)

German American Metal & Novelty Works, Inc. v. Shubert-Anderson Co., 124 A.D. 912, 108 N.Y.S. 1133 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

124 A.D. 912 (German American Metal & Novelty Works, Inc. v. Shubert-Anderson Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related