General
Jane Wilson and Mary Wilson, Respondents, v. Thomas A. Nevins, Appellant
142 A.D. 932·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1911·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Jane Wilson and Mary Wilson, Respondents, v. Thomas A. Nevins, Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment entered in the New York county clerk’s office on the 23d day of June, 1910, upon the verdict of a jury, and from an order entered on the 28th day of June, 1910, denying a motion for a new trial.
[MAJORITY — Per Curiam:]
Per Curiam:
The judgment should be modified upon respondent’s stipulation by deducting §553.30 from the amount recovered, and as modified the judgment and the order appealed from should be affirmed,- without costs. Present — Ingraham, P. J. (dissenting), McLaughlin, Laughlin, Scott and Dowling, JJ.
[DISSENT — Ingraham, P. J. (dissenting):]
Ingraham, P. J. (dissenting):
I dissent upon the ground that there is no evidence to justify a finding that the defendant had constituted his wife as his agent to make the purchases in question. Judgment modified as directed in opinion, and as modified affirmed, without costs. Settle order on notice.