Hyperlawhypertext legal database Chittenden v. San Domingo Improvement Co. 111 N.Y.S. 499

← Cases

Chittenden v. San Domingo Improvement Co.

111 N.Y.S. 499 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1908-06-26 English

Decision Majority — PER CURIAM. · Dissent — McLAUGHLIN, J.

Contents
p. 499
CHITTENDEN v. SAN DOMINGO IMPROVEMENT CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
June 26, 1908.)

Headnote

Appeal from Special Term.
Action by Caroline Sayles Chittenden, formerly Caroline M. Holls, executrix of Frederick W. Holls, against the San Domingo Improvement Company of New York. From an order refusing to vacate or modify an attachment, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
See 110 N. Y. Supp. 148 .
p. 500
Argued before INGRAHAM, McLAUGHLIN, LAUGHLIN, HOUGHTON, and SCOTT, JJ.
Frank E. Smith, for appellant.
Frederick W. Hinrichs, for respondent

Affirmed.

(dissenting). I dissent, on the ground that the facts stated'are insufficient to show that the.plaintiff is entitled to recover any specific sum to exceed $25,000, and that there is no evidence to show the value of services rendered beyond that amount. '

For that reason, the attachment' should be reduced to $25,000.