Tanenbaum v. Feist

City of New York Municipal Court

Tanenbaum v. Feist

23 N.Y.S. 319, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 941

DecidedMay 9, 1893

StatusPublished

This text of 23 N.Y.S. 319 (Tanenbaum v. Feist) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tanenbaum v. Feist, 23 N.Y.S. 319, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 941 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

EHRLICH, C. J.

The action, instead of being for damages resulting from the breach of a special contract, was to recover for moneys paid, laid out, and expended for the defendant, at his request, There was no proof of any direction from the defendant to pay the money and no warrant for a recovery on any such cause of action. The exceptions taken are without merit. The plaintiffs having failed to submit to a nonsuit, the direction to find for the defendant was right, and the judgment entered on the verdict must be affirmed, with costs.

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

EHRLICH, C. J.

The action, instead of being for damages resulting from the breach of a special contract, was to recover for moneys paid, laid out, and expended for the defendant, at his request, There was no proof of any direction from the defendant to pay the money and no warrant for a recovery on any such cause of action. The exceptions taken are without merit. The plaintiffs having failed to submit to a nonsuit, the direction to find for the defendant was right, and the judgment entered on the verdict must be affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

23 N.Y.S. 319, 52 N.Y. St. Rep. 941, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tanenbaum-v-feist-nynyccityct-1893.