Jackson v. Jaffe

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Jackson v. Jaffe

158 N.Y.S. 546

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 26, 1916

StatusPublished

This text of 158 N.Y.S. 546 (Jackson v. Jaffe) 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

Jackson v. Jaffe, 158 N.Y.S. 546 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover for the value of a suit of clothes claimed to have been lost through the negligence of the defendants. He has recovered a judgment for $20, and the defendants appeal.

There is nothing in the record to show how or in what manner the defendants, or either of them, are connected with the Hotel St. George, where plaintiff was stopping when he claims the clothes 'were stolen. It simply appears from the testimony that plaintiff had a room at the hotel. Who the defendant Jaffe is, or what, if any, relation he sustains to the hotel, does not appear ; nor is it shown that the hotel is a corporate body, or a copartnership, or why it is made a party defendant.

Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff brought this action to recover for the value of a suit of clothes claimed to have been lost through the negligence of the defendants. He has recovered a judgment for $20, and the defendants appeal.

There is nothing in the record to show how or in what manner the defendants, or either of them, are connected with the Hotel St. George, where plaintiff was stopping when he claims the clothes 'were stolen. It simply appears from the testimony that plaintiff had a room at the hotel. Who the defendant Jaffe is, or what, if any, relation he sustains to the hotel, does not appear ; nor is it shown that the hotel is a corporate body, or a copartnership, or why it is made a party defendant.

Judgment reversed, and a new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 N.Y.S. 546, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-jaffe-nyappterm-1916.