Moore v. Clarence L. Smith Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Moore v. Clarence L. Smith Co.

95 N.Y.S. 1147

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 3, 1905

StatusPublished

This text of 95 N.Y.S. 1147 (Moore v. Clarence L. Smith Co.) 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

Moore v. Clarence L. Smith Co., 95 N.Y.S. 1147 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon - the evidence, the justice was well authorized to find that the terra cotta blocks in question came into the defendant’s hands as a bailee for hire; and, there being no explanation of the failure to return them, the plaintiff’s case was sufficiently supported, so far as to justify the finding in his favor upon the disputed item of §79.90. The counterclaim upon a promissory note was met by the assertion of an agreement whereby this item of indebtedness was applied to an open account between the parties, with a balance in favor of the plaintiff, and the evidence sustains the finding in his favor. This issue was properly in the case and was fully litigated. We find no-reason for disturbing the result reached, and the judgment is therefore affirmed, with costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon - the evidence, the justice was well authorized to find that the terra cotta blocks in question came into the defendant’s hands as a bailee for hire; and, there being no explanation of the failure to return them, the plaintiff’s case was sufficiently supported, so far as to justify the finding in his favor upon the disputed item of §79.90. The counterclaim upon a promissory note was met by the assertion of an agreement whereby this item of indebtedness was applied to an open account between the parties, with a balance in favor of the plaintiff, and the evidence sustains the finding in his favor. This issue was properly in the case and was fully litigated. We find no-reason for disturbing the result reached, and the judgment is therefore affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

95 N.Y.S. 1147, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-clarence-l-smith-co-nyappterm-1905.