Hyperlawhypertext legal database Holmes, Booth & Haydens v. Faber 65 N.Y.S. 1136

← Cases

Holmes, Booth & Haydens v. Faber

65 N.Y.S. 1136 Court N.Y. App. Div. Decision date 1900-06-22 English

Contents

Majority

p. 1136
HOLMES, BOOTH & HAYDENS, Respondent, v. FABER, Appellant.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
June 22, 1900.)

Headnote

Action by Holmes, Booth & Hay-dens against Eberhard Faber. From a judgment for plaintiff, and from an order denying a new 'trial, defendant appeals. Reversed. Charles T. Haviland, for appellant. D. M. Porter, for respondent.

In this case the same question is presented as in the case of Leonard v. Faber (decided herewith) 65 N. Y. Supp. 391 . It arises in the same way and must be determined upon the same considerations. The judgment should therefore be reversed, and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event.

VAN BRUNT, P. J., dissents.