Haller v. Ingraham

101 N.Y.S. 789
CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
DecidedDecember 11, 1906
StatusPublished

This text of 101 N.Y.S. 789 (Haller v. Ingraham) 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
Haller v. Ingraham, 101 N.Y.S. 789 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In Vestner v. Findlay, 10 Misc. Rep. 410, 31 N. Y. Supp. 138, upon which the learned justice below relied as authority for giving judgment for defendant, the question before the court was whether the managing clerk of an attorney retained to perform certain legal services, in the absence of proof of assignment of the attorney’s claim, could maintain an action thereon in his own name, and it was held that he could not. In the case at bar there is uncontradicted evidence of a paroi assignment, and the judgment must be reversed.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

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

Related

Vestner v. Findlay
31 N.Y.S. 138 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1894)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
101 N.Y.S. 789, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haller-v-ingraham-nyappterm-1906.