Weber v. Thom

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Weber v. Thom

52 N.Y.S. 1061

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 11, 1898

StatusPublished

This text of 52 N.Y.S. 1061 (Weber v. Thom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Weber v. Thom, 52 N.Y.S. 1061 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1898).

Pincite

Opinion

GOODRICH, P. J.

The plaintiff, as agent of one Edward D. Pier-son, a dealer and shipper of milk, from Orange county to New York City, brings this action under section 29 of the domestic commerce law (5 Rev. St. [9th Ed.] p. 3518), to recover a penalty of $50 for the unlawful use of a milk can belonging to Pierson. The can was in use at premises on Amsterdam avenue, in the city of New York, where a Ferris Wheel was in operation, and was used to contain water to he supplied to the engines. The main question of fact was whether the can was being used by the defendant and his employés, or by his son and his employés. There was contradictory evidence tending to show the ownership and operation of the wheel, and the collection of entrance fees, both by the defendant and his son, as hearing upon the identification of the person using the can; so that the question was one clearly for the consideration of the jury, to whom the court submitted the subject, under a specific and proper direction. The finding of the jury was for the plaintiff, and is not to be disturbed.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

GOODRICH, P. J.

The plaintiff, as agent of one Edward D. Pier-son, a dealer and shipper of milk, from Orange county to New York City, brings this action under section 29 of the domestic commerce law (5 Rev. St. [9th Ed.] p. 3518), to recover a penalty of $50 for the unlawful use of a milk can belonging to Pierson. The can was in use at premises on Amsterdam avenue, in the city of New York, where a Ferris Wheel was in operation, and was used to contain water to he supplied to the engines. The main question of fact was whether the can was being used by the defendant and his employés, or by his son and his employés. There was contradictory evidence tending to show the ownership and operation of the wheel, and the collection of entrance fees, both by the defendant and his son, as hearing upon the identification of the person using the can; so that the question was one clearly for the consideration of the jury, to whom the court submitted the subject, under a specific and proper direction. The finding of the jury was for the plaintiff, and is not to be disturbed.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 N.Y.S. 1061, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weber-v-thom-nyappdiv-1898.