Larkins v. McGinley

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Larkins v. McGinley

88 N.Y.S. 153

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 5, 1904

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 88 N.Y.S. 153 (Larkins v. McGinley) 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

Larkins v. McGinley, 88 N.Y.S. 153 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

FREEDMAN, P. J.

The complaint complained for services, work, and labor performed for the defendant’s intestate between May 16, 1901, and June 15, 1902. The defendant offered no testimony upon the trial. The testimony of the plaintiff established a cause of action against the estate of the decedent. Services on the part of the plaintiff were shown to have been rendered; promises on the part of the decedent to compensate the plaintiff for such services, and their value, were shown. There was some testimony given from which it might fairly be inferred that the plaintiff had received certain checks from the defendant in payment of at least a portion of the services sued for, and several checks were produced, and identified by the plaintiff as having her indorsement thereon. The amount of these checks was not shown, nor were they introduced in evidence. As the case stood at the close of the case, the complaint should not have been dismissed. Schlesinger v. Jud, 61 App. Div. 453, 70 N. Y. Supp. 616.

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

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

FREEDMAN, P. J.

The complaint complained for services, work, and labor performed for the defendant’s intestate between May 16, 1901, and June 15, 1902. The defendant offered no testimony upon the trial. The testimony of the plaintiff established a cause of action against the estate of the decedent. Services on the part of the plaintiff were shown to have been rendered; promises on the part of the decedent to compensate the plaintiff for such services, and their value, were shown. There was some testimony given from which it might fairly be inferred that the plaintiff had received certain checks from the defendant in payment of at least a portion of the services sued for, and several checks were produced, and identified by the plaintiff as having her indorsement thereon. The amount of these checks was not shown, nor were they introduced in evidence. As the case stood at the close of the case, the complaint should not have been dismissed. Schlesinger v. Jud, 61 App. Div. 453, 70 N. Y. Supp. 616.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 N.Y.S. 153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larkins-v-mcginley-nyappterm-1904.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack