Golding v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Golding v. City of New York

76 N.Y.S. 1020

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 9, 1902·Published

Opinion

McLAUGHLIN, J.

The question presented on this appeal is precisely like the question presented on the appeal from the order fixing the compensation of Charles Frederick Hoffman, Jr., decided herewith. 76 N. Y. Supp. 137. The conclusion there reached necessitates a reversal of the order here appealed from, and for the reasons given in the opinion in that case. The order appealed from, therefore, must be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10 costs, without prejudice, however, to the right of the respondent to renew his application, if he be so advised, upon competent proof as to the value of the services rendered. All concur.

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

McLAUGHLIN, J.

The question presented on this appeal is precisely like the question presented on the appeal from the order fixing the compensation of Charles Frederick Hoffman, Jr., decided herewith. 76 N. Y. Supp. 137. The conclusion there reached necessitates a reversal of the order here appealed from, and for the reasons given in the opinion in that case. The order appealed from, therefore, must be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with $10 costs, without prejudice, however, to the right of the respondent to renew his application, if he be so advised, upon competent proof as to the value of the services rendered. All concur.

Golding v. City of New York, 76 N.Y.S. 1020 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1902).

Pincite

76 N.Y.S. 1020 (Golding v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related