Reitzfeld v. Sobel
114 N.Y.S. 27
Opinion
The testimony given on the part of the plaintiff failed to show that she was hired for any definite period, and, as her right to recover for one month’s wages depended upon such proof, the judgment must be reversed. Frank v. Man. Mat. & Dis. (Sup.) 107 N. Y. Supp. 404.
Judgment reversed and new trial.ordered, with costs to appellants to abide the event.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Reitzfeld v. Sobel, 114 N.Y.S. 27 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1909).
114 N.Y.S. 27 (Reitzfeld v. Sobel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Frank v. Manhattan Maternity & Dispensary
107 N.Y.S. 404 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1907)