Pick v. Bartelstone

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Pick v. Bartelstone

33 Misc. 762, 67 N.Y.S. 908

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 15, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 33 Misc. 762 (Pick v. Bartelstone) 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

Pick v. Bartelstone, 33 Misc. 762, 67 N.Y.S. 908 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The uncontradicted proof shows that the sketches were delivered to the defendants for examination with a view of obtaining from them orders for work, and that when the plaintiff rendered them a hill containing an item of charge therefor, they returned the sketches and the foimer then “ crossed out ” such item from the hill. Under these circumstances, a recovery for work, labor and services rendered and materials furnished cannot be sustained.

The plaintiff contends, however, that the sketches were returned in such a mutilated condition that they are practically valueless.

Even conceding this to be so, damages upon that theory cannot be recovered in the action as now framed.

The judgment must, therefore, he reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the' appellants to abide the event.

Present: Beekmak, P. J., Giegebicii and O’Gobmak, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide event.

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