Smith v. . Duchardt
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from the judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of Hew York, affirming the judgment of the Special Term in favor of the plaintiff, against the defendant, for $250. The plaintiff sued to recover for services rendered as counsel.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of Hew York, affirming the judgment of the Special Term in favor of the plaintiff, against the defendant, for $250. The plaintiff sued to recover for services rendered as counsel. The following instrument was put in evidence by the plaintiff: “ We, the undersigned, hereby agree to pay our share of costs, equally divided, for the purpose of engaging counsel and to bring our cases before the courts, in reference to the action of the board of health in reference to the removal of our legitimate business by the 15th of…
1Opinion of the CourtAkdbews, J.
The writing, signed by the defendant and others, was not a contract with the plaintiff, nor was it an open authority to him or to any other persons to take legal proceedings in behalf of those executing it. The language of the instrument implies that the person signing it had a common interest in the, action of the board of health, and a common right to be maintained in opposition to it. But it does not import that they were jointly interested in conducting the business to which the action of the board related.
The agreement was the several undertaking by the subscribers to contribute to a…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Canda v. TottenNew York Supreme Court · 1895