Case ID: ny_185/html/0617-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Edward T. Bartlett, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The Camden Iron Works, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Defendant, and William H. Masterson et al., Respondents.
    
      Camden Iron Works v. City of New York, 104 App. Div. 272, modified.
    (Argued May 24, 1906;
    decided June 21, 1906.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 13,1905, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term in an action to enforce a lien upon moneys due from the city of New York to the defendant Masterson.
    
      Henry Galbraith Ward and Norman B. Beecher for appellant.
    
      L. Laflin Kellogg and Alfred C. Petté. for respondents.
   Judgment of Trial Term modified by deducting therefrom the sum of $1,803.26, being the interest allowed upon the balance of respondents’ counterclaim over and above the amount of appellant’s claim from May 19, 1902, to June 16, 1901, the date of the decision herein, and as modified affirmed, without costs to either party. No opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Werner and Hiscock, JJ. Absent: O’Brien, J. Edward T. Bartlett, J., votes for reversal in following memorandum :

Edward T. Bartlett, J.

(dissenting). I agree with the dissenting opinion of Patterson, J., in the Appellate Division, concurred in by Presiding Justice Van Brunt, to the effect that there was reversible error in the rulings of the trial judge, when the. inspectors for the city of New York were under examination by the counsel for the plaintiff. The most important point in the plaintiff’s case was to establish, if possible, that these inspectors for the city were biased and not acting in good faith.