Warshawsky v. Bonewur
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
. Appeal by the plaintiffs, William Warshawsky and another, ■ copartners, etc., from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of Hew York,, in favor of the defendant. The plaintiffs owed the defendant $172 for merchandise purchased of the defendant, of which $150 was reduced to a promissory note.
Read the full summary
. Appeal by the plaintiffs, William Warshawsky and another, ■ copartners, etc., from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of Hew York,, in favor of the defendant. The plaintiffs owed the defendant $172 for merchandise purchased of the defendant, of which $150 was reduced to a promissory note. The defendant went to Europe for recreation on December 1, and returned the following March 1, 1908. He had in his employment in his business as merchant Harold Melzer, whom he testifies was a salesman, and ¡Rosie Goldberg, whom he says was his bookkeeper. The plaintiffs became insolvent, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Gaynor, J.:
It is the law that it was for the defendant to protect the plaintiffs against the said note when it came due, if the said composition agreement was his (Harloe v. Foster, 53 N. Y. 385). In order to prove this the plaintiffs had to call the defendant and the said employe Melzer. Melzer testified that the defendant never instructed or authorized him to sign the composition agreement. The defendant testified that Melzer had no authority to sign the agreement; that when he left for Europe he left his business in charge not of Melzer but of the said bookkeeper ¡Rosie Goldberg. When his…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Harloe v. . FosterNew York Court of Appeals · 1873