Marggraf v. McLean
This text of 31 Misc. 820 (Marggraf v. McLean) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The plaintiff was bound to prove that the testator engaged him to perform the services sued for, or that they were performed with his knowledge or consent. 6 App. Div. 535. No attempt was made to offer such testimony. The defendant’s testator was, so far as the evidence in this case shows, apparently entirely ignorant of the fact that the said services were rendered, or material furnished. Therefore, plaintiff has. no legal right to ask compensation therefor. The verdict is,, therefore, against the law and the evidence and must be reversed.
It is so directed and a new trial is ordered, with costs to appellant,
Sohtjohmah, J., concurs.
Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
31 Misc. 820, 64 N.Y.S. 1112, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marggraf-v-mclean-nynyccityct-1900.