Van Pelt v. Otter
The Superior Court of New York City
The action was to recover for services rendered by the plaintiff, as an attorney at law for the defendant, in prosecuting an action •against the Brevoort Petroleum Company.
Read the full summary
The action was to recover for services rendered by the plaintiff, as an attorney at law for the defendant, in prosecuting an action •against the Brevoort Petroleum Company. The defendant, after denying the employment of the plaintiff, alleged that the services mentioned in the complaint were rendered by the plaintiff and one John H.Hull, under the firm of Yan Pelt & Hull j that said plaintiff and said Hull were copartners' in the transaction of law business; that the services were not rendered by the plaintiff individually, but by the said law firm of Yan Pelt & Hull, and that Hull should…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court:
Monell, J.
We cannot disturb the verdict in this case.
The two main questions submitted to the jury, and determined- by them against the defendant, are conclusive, if there is any evidence to sustain them.
The verdict is general, and we must assume that the jury found that, at the time of the settlement with Hull, the defendant knew or had sufficient notice, or reason to believe, that Hull was not a partner, and had no interest in the claim for services.
*207At the commencement of the litigation against the Petroleum Company, and until after the decision of the General Term reversing the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- McBurney v. WellmanNew York Supreme Court · 1864
- Tibbs v. MorrisNew York Supreme Court · 1865
- Bryan v. BowlesNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1861
3Cited by3 opinions
- Barker v. Cunard S. S. Co.New York Supreme Court · 1895
- Barker v. Cunard Steamship Co.New York Supreme Court · 1895
- Kelly v. FergusonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1873