Case ID: nys_27/html/1132-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "NEWBURGER, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LAJOS, Respondent, v. EDEN MUSEE AMERICAN CO., Limited, Appellant.
    (City Court of New York, General Term.
    January 18, 1894.)
    Action by Munczi La jas against the Eden Musee American Company, Limited.
    Argued before NEWBURGER, FITZSIMONS, and MCCARTHY, JJ.
    Seligman & Seligman, for appellant
    Dittenhoefer &' Gerber, for respondent.
   NEWBURGER, J.

This action was brought to recover $150, claimed to be -due, arising from deductions that had been made by the defendant from the salary that became payable to plaintiff. The answer, among other defenses, alleged that the contract sued upon is void as being within the statute of frauds. On the trial of the action, the defendant moved, at the conclusion •of plaintiff’s case, as well as at the end of the trial, to dismiss the complaint, on the ground that the contract is within the statute of frauds, as not to be performed,within one year, and therefore no recovery can be had on any such ■oral contract, which motion was denied, and exception taken. The trial justice properly denied the motion to dismiss. There was a complete contract between the parties, by reason of the correspondence and telegrams between them. A careful examination of the printed case fails to disclose any errors on the trial that would warrant us in disturbing the judgment herein. Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur. .