Case ID: nys_72/html/1126-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HASCALL, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

RUSH, Respondent, v. KLEIN, Appellant.
    (City Court of New York,
    General Term.
    May, 1901.)
    Action hy Thomas E. Rush against Mary Klein.
    Menken Bros. (Mortimer M. Men-ken, of counsel), for appellant. J. Harry Hull (Ohos. W. Ridgway, of counsel), for respondent.
   HASCALL, J.

The appellant, hy the answer interposed, is in position to contest each item of the plaintiff’s claim, thus bringing this case within Spence v. Simis, 137 N. Y. 616, 33 N. E. 554; and we therefore decide that the order appealed from was properly made. Order affirmed, with costs and disbursements to respondent. Order affirmed, with costs to respondent.

OONLAN and O’DWYER, JJ., concur.