Davenport v. Hulme
The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo
Appeal from jury term. Action by Nisbet V. Davenport against George B. Hulme and the East Bay Land & Improvement Company to recover for services alleged to have been performed by plaintiff for defendants. From a judgment dismissing the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
1Opinion of the CourtBeekman, J.
The complaint alleges that in the month of May, 1892, the defendants employed Joseph M. Davenport to perform certain services for them, for which they agreed to pay him the sum of $20,000; that the services were performed by him in so far as he was permitted so to do by the defendants, but that they have failed to pay him the sum so agreed upon for his compensation; and that the claim therefor was duly assigned to the plaintiff. The defendants answered, putting in issue the validity of the alleged contract. Upon the trial, at the close of the plaintiff’s case, a motion was made by the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Woodstock Iron Co. v. Richmond & Danville Extension Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Devlin v. . BradyNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
3Cited by3 opinions
- Ridgely v. KeeneAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
- Barry v. MulhallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
- Coffey v. BurkeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909