Hartridge School v. Riordan
This text of 112 N.Y.S. 1089 (Hartridge School v. Riordan) 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.
Opinions
Whether the contract between the plaintiff’s assignor and the defendant, relative to the introduction of his daughter into a school kept by the former as a resident pupil for an entire year [1090]*1090at a certain charge, and without deduction for absence or withdrawal, was concluded by and between them upon those terms, was a question of fact, determined by the trial justice in favor of the defendant, who from the testimony adduced (much under the pleadings being irrelevant) does not appear to have expressly contracted, nor does he impliedly appear to have so agreed as it was not shown that his attention was directed or called to matter pertaining thereto on an application blank of remote date, or in a catalogue of the current year. The judgment rendered for the plaintiff for the sum that was payable in advance must therefore be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed, with costs to the respondent.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
112 N.Y.S. 1089, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartridge-school-v-riordan-nyappterm-1908.