Case ID: nys_69/html/1144-03.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

RAILWAY ADVERTISING CO., Respondent, v. BAGGOT, Appellant.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    April 22, 1901.)
    Action by the Railway Advertising Company against At-more L. Baggot. From a judgment for the plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Milton Mayer, for appellant.
    Einstein & Townsend, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The sole question here is as to the extent of an agent’s authority. The evidence was conflicting. It was submitted to the jury in a fair and careful charge, and we see no reason to interfere with their verdict Judgment affirmed, with costs.