Case ID: misc_133/html/0189-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Four Eighteen Central Park West Corporation, Respondent, v. John R. Lautenbach, Appellant.
    Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
    November 21, 1928.
    
      Charles J. Holland, for the appellant.
    
      Maurice M. Cohn, for the respondent.
   Per Curiam.

Although the action was based on the existence of a lease between plaintiff and defendant, not only did plaintiff fail to prove the delivery of a lease but the meagre evidence presented negatived any such delivery. The trial judge erred in ruling that the only way to prove the authority of the so-called agent was by his principal, for the acts of any agent with respect to the subject-matter of the agency, performed with the knowledge of his principal, may be considered in determining the extent of his authority.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Delehanty, Lydon and Chain, JJ.