Case ID: nys_92/html/1119-04.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. GIEGERICH, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CHRISTENFELD, Respondent, v. DAVIDSON et al., Appellants.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    March 3, 1905.)
    Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Fourth District. Action by Samuel H. Christenfeld against Max Davidson and another. From a Municipal Court judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal. Reversed. Joseph J. Harris, for appellants. Steuer & Hoffman (Max D. Steuer, of counsel), for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

We are unable to distinguish the contract involved in this action from that which was considered in Jacobs v. Cohen (Sup.) 90 N. Y. Supp. 854, and was condemned by the Appellate Division of the Second Department as contrary to public policy and void. Upon the authority of that case, the judgment must be reversed, and the complaint dismissed, with costs to the appellant in this court and the court below.

GIEGERICH, J.

(concurring in result only). Although I agree with the dissenting opinion in Jacobs v. Cohen (Sup.) 90 N. Y. Supp. 854, I nevertheless feel constrained by the decision of the majority in that case to vote for a reversal.