Kupfer v. Holtzmann
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Twelfth District. Action by Henry Kupfer against Waldemar Holtzmann. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.
It may be conceded that the contract of employment did not contemplate that defendant should incur a personal liability to return the sums advanced to him unless he should earn enough in commissions to offset the advances. If, therefore, plaintiff had fulfilled his contract, no action could have been maintained against him to recover the excess of advances over commissions. Schlesinger v. Burland, 42 *363Misc. Rep. 206, 85 N. Y. Supp. 350. But defendant did not complete his contract,- which was the consideration for the advances to him. His agreement was to give his services and devote all of his…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Schlesinger v. BurlandNew York Supreme Court · 1903
3Cited by6 opinions
- Usachem, Inc. v. Howard A. Goldstein and Howard A. Goldstein D/B/A Goldseal AssociatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1975
- Johnson v. Quayle & Son Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
- Larson v. WatzkeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1935
- Insurance, Inc. v. SandersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1964
- Hollender v. FriedenbergNew York Supreme Court · 1908
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.