Hyperlawhypertext legal database Rush v. Klein 72 N.Y.S. 1126

← Cases

Rush v. Klein

72 N.Y.S. 1126 Court General Term. English

Delivered by HASCALL, J.

Contents

Majority

p. 1126
RUSH, Respondent, v. KLEIN, Appellant.
(City Court of New York,
General Term.
May, 1901.)

Headnote

Action hy Thomas E. Rush against Mary Klein.
Menken Bros. (Mortimer M. Men-ken, of counsel), for appellant. J. Harry Hull (Ohos. W. Ridgway, of counsel), for respondent.

The appellant, hy the answer interposed, is in position to contest each item of the plaintiff’s claim, thus bringing this case within Spence v. Simis, 137 N. Y. 616 , 33 N. E. 554 ; and we therefore decide that the order appealed from was properly made. Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements to respondent. Order affirmed, with costs to respondent.

OONLAN and O’DWYER, JJ., concur.

Cases cited