Legal Opinion

Herrmann v. Koref

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided April 15, 1905Published

Appeát, by the plaintiffs' from a judgment of the City Court of the city of New York in favor of the defendant, entered upon a verdict directed hy the' court and from an order denying plaintiffs’ motion for a new trial.

1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.

The defendant, sued for a balance of $100, pleaded payment. In order to prove his defense he sought to show that a sum originally paid hy him to Henry Herrmann personally on another transaction had hy agreement been applied to the payment of his indebtedness to the firm. Hpon this question the evidence, such as it was, was conflicting. At the close of the evidence both sides moved. for the • direction of a verdict. Defendant’s motion was denied. Before any verdict was directed or recorded, plaintiffs asked to go to the jury upon the question of the application.of the check for $100 given by…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Eldredge v. MathewsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API