Case ID: ny-sup-ct_14/html/0088-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Barnard, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ALDELLO DENMAN, Respondent, v. HUGH CAMPBELL, Appellant.
    
      incidence — as to intention of one party to a contract.
    
    Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Richmond county, affirming a judgment in favor of the plaintiff recovered in a Justice’s Court.
    The only issue litigated on the trial betweén the parties was, whether the plaintiff made the contract for the labor in question with the defendant or his son. Upon this issue the justice allowed answer to be given to the following questions, under defendant’s objection: Who did you suppose you were making the contract with? Answer. I supposed I was making the contract with Hugh Campbell. Held, that this was error. (Niehóls v. The Kingdom Iron Ore Go., 56 N. Y., 618.)
    Also, the question : Is Donal Campbell a man of responsibility ? Answer. So far as I know, he was not responsible. Held, that this was also error. (Green v. Disbrow, 56 N. Y., 334.)
    
      George Gallagher, for the appellant. John P. Victory, for the respondent.
   Opinion by

Barnard, J.

Talcott and Pratt, JJ., concurred.

Judgment of County Court reversed, with costs.