Case Name: Edna Conroy, Respondent, v. Frederic De P. Foster and Edward F. De Beixedon, as Executors and Trustees, etc., Defendants, and Benjamin S. Goldsmith and Others, Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1928-04
Citations: 223 A.D. 850
Docket Number: 
Parties: Edna Conroy, Respondent, v. Frederic De P. Foster and Edward F. De Beixedon, as Executors and Trustees, etc., Defendants, and Benjamin S. Goldsmith and Others, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 223
Pages: 850–850

Head Matter:
Edna Conroy, Respondent, v. Frederic De P. Foster and Edward F. De Beixedon, as Executors and Trustees, etc., Defendants, and Benjamin S. Goldsmith and Others, Appellants.

Opinion:
Judgment and order reversed upon the law and the facts, and a new trial granted, costs to appellants to abide the event. By the complaint the plaintiff claimed that the window cleaner was in the employment of defendants Goldsmith. The case was submitted to the jury upon that theory. The finding of the jury that the window cleaner was in the employment of defendants Goldsmith was against the weight of the evidence. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur.