Warnier v. Boessneck
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal by the defendants, Otto Boessneck and others, from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiffs, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 29th day of January, 1896, upon the decision of the court-rendered after a trial at the New York Special Term. This is an action for an accounting.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendants, Otto Boessneck and others, from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiffs, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 29th day of January, 1896, upon the decision of the court-rendered after a trial at the New York Special Term. This is an action for an accounting. At the time of the events which pertain to the controversy the plaintiffs were partners doing business at Rheins, France, having a branch office in New York. The defendants Boessneck and Broesel were partners doing business at Glau chati, Germany,…
1Opinion of the Court
O’Brien, J.:
The single question here, as it was upon the trial below, is as to whether the French and German firms agreed to divide the losses resulting from their dealings with Sylvester, Bell & Co. on capital and merchandise account, or on merchandise account alone. From the letters which preceded the one of April twenty-eighth, and the agreement of May sixth, it is evident that in the effort to reach an adjustment the plaintiffs took the position that the capital having been wiped out, the parties should share equally between them the loss on merchandise account, while the German house…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Bailly v. BettiNew York Court of Appeals · 1925
- City of Rochester v. Rochester Railway Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905