Salsberg v. Tobias

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Salsberg v. Tobias

84 N.Y.S. 151

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 22, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 84 N.Y.S. 151 (Salsberg v. Tobias) 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

Salsberg v. Tobias, 84 N.Y.S. 151 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The pleadings herein were oral. Plaintiff claimed and proved herself entitled to two weeks’ wages, earned in the employ of the defendant as bookkeeper, amounting to $10. Defendant claimed payment. Although the testimony is not very clear, it appears that the defendant gave his check for the amount due the plaintiff to the Legal Aid Society, who at one time had the plaintiff’s claim for collection, and that this check was subsequently returned by the bank upon which it was drawn as being not good. The trial court rendered judgment in these words, viz.: “Judgment rendered

in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff. Plaintiff is duly entitled to $10.” This determines nothing. The plaintiff, if “duly entitled to $10,” should have had judgment therefor.

Judgment reversed. New trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

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

PER CURIAM.

The pleadings herein were oral. Plaintiff claimed and proved herself entitled to two weeks’ wages, earned in the employ of the defendant as bookkeeper, amounting to $10. Defendant claimed payment. Although the testimony is not very clear, it appears that the defendant gave his check for the amount due the plaintiff to the Legal Aid Society, who at one time had the plaintiff’s claim for collection, and that this check was subsequently returned by the bank upon which it was drawn as being not good. The trial court rendered judgment in these words, viz.: “Judgment rendered

in favor of the defendant and against the plaintiff. Plaintiff is duly entitled to $10.” This determines nothing. The plaintiff, if “duly entitled to $10,” should have had judgment therefor.

Judgment reversed. New trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.Y.S. 151, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salsberg-v-tobias-nyappterm-1903.