Legal Opinion
Purcell v. Aronson
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided April 30, 1896Published
Action by Ruth Purcell, an infant, etc., against Rudolph Aronson.
1Opinion of the CourtDaly, P. J.
The plaintiff’s testimony shows that she was first sent for by a Mr. Chase in *1148the office; that she saw Mr. Aronson, who referred her to Mr. Bond, and Mr. Bond employed her; that Mr. Aronson referred her to Mr. Bond for the work which she was to do. This would be sufficient to make out a case of hiring by Mr. Aronson, and it was' for him to show that he was acting as agent, and was acting within the scope of his authority in hiring her; also, that she was given to understand by some kind of notice that he was only acting on behalf of the company. Whitman v. Johnson, 10 Misc. Rep. 725, 31 N. Y.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mahoney v. KentNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894
- Whitman v. JohnsonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895
- Hespe v. WymanAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1896
- Kahn v. WeillNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894
- Whitman v. JohnsonNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895