Balet v. New York & New Jersey Bridge Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
•Appeal by the plaintiff,'Joseph. W. Balet, from an order of -the Supreme Court, made at the New York Trial Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 25th day ■of July, 1898, dismissing the complaint “ on the ground that the plaintiff has not proved employment or ratification thereof,” and directing the exceptions to be heard at the Appellate Division in the first instance.
Read the full summary
•Appeal by the plaintiff,'Joseph. W. Balet, from an order of -the Supreme Court, made at the New York Trial Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 25th day ■of July, 1898, dismissing the complaint “ on the ground that the plaintiff has not proved employment or ratification thereof,” and directing the exceptions to be heard at the Appellate Division in the first instance. This appeal was transferred from the first department to the second department.
1Opinion of the Court
Woodward, J.:
The question involved in this appeal is whether the plaintiff was •employed to draw certain plans and specifications for a bridge to be ■constructed over the Hudson or North river, from New -York city to New Jersey. It is not contended that there was any written contract, or any employment by reason of any resolution on the part of the board of directors, but the action is brought on an oral employ-on ent by the vice-president, Mr. Greene, and the secretary and treas-firer, Mr. Swan; an acceptance of the work by the company, and a representation by thetvice-president and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Davies v. Harvey Steel Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896
- Tyler v. Anglo-American Savings & Loan Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1898
3Cited by2 opinions
- Norton v. Genesee National Savings & Loan Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
- Dupignac v. BernstromNew York Supreme Court · 1902