Plattner v. Weiler

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Plattner v. Weiler

26 Misc. 813, 57 N.Y.S. 98

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 26 Misc. 813 (Plattner v. Weiler) 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

Plattner v. Weiler, 26 Misc. 813, 57 N.Y.S. 98 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Freedman, P. J.

This action was brought to recover the sum of $82.50 for services of the plaintiff as an advertising agent, in advertising the property of the defendant from September 4 to October 14, 1898.

The defense was a general denial and a counterclaim. The plaintiff proved his cause of action in the trial, the defendant interposing no testimony to disprove it. The burden of proof then rested upon the defendant to establish his counterclaim, upon which there was a distinct conflict of testimony. There is nothing appearing in the case from which it can be urged Aflat the court below erred in the exercise of its right to render judgment in favor [814]*814of the plaintiff, and, therefore, the judgment should be affirmed, with costs. ’.........

MacLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Freedman, P. J.

This action was brought to recover the sum of $82.50 for services of the plaintiff as an advertising agent, in advertising the property of the defendant from September 4 to October 14, 1898.

The defense was a general denial and a counterclaim. The plaintiff proved his cause of action in the trial, the defendant interposing no testimony to disprove it. The burden of proof then rested upon the defendant to establish his counterclaim, upon which there was a distinct conflict of testimony. There is nothing appearing in the case from which it can be urged Aflat the court below erred in the exercise of its right to render judgment in favor [814]*814of the plaintiff, and, therefore, the judgment should be affirmed, with costs. ’.........

MacLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 Misc. 813, 57 N.Y.S. 98, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/plattner-v-weiler-nyappterm-1899.