Case Name: Joesph W. Stern et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of Jos. W. Stern & Co., Appellants, v. Sigmund Romberg et al., Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1918-03-19
Citations: 223 N.Y. 584
Docket Number: 
Parties: Joesph W. Stern et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of Jos. W. Stern & Co., Appellants, v. Sigmund Romberg et al., Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 223
Pages: 584–585

Head Matter:
Joesph W. Stern et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of Jos. W. Stern & Co., Appellants, v. Sigmund Romberg et al., Respondents.
Stern v. Romberg, 169 App. Div. 925, affirmed.
(Argued March 5, 1918;
decided March 19, 1918.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 4, 1915, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court on trial at Special Term. The action was brought to enjoin the carrying out by the defendants of an alleged unlawful conspiracy to deprive the plaintiffs of property rights acquired by virtue of a written agreement with the defendant Sigmund Romberg. At the opening of the trial the defendants moved to dismiss the complaint upon' the ground that the agreement on which the action was founded was inequitable and lacked mutuality of obligation and remedy. Although the plaintiffs offered evidence in support of the allegations of their complaint, the court at Special Term rejected the evidence thus offered, on the ground that the plaintiffs’ rights were, in their last analysis, predicated upon their agreement with the defendant Sigmund Romberg, and that this agreement was unenforcible in a court of equity. In accordance with these views the court, without receiving any evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs other than the written agreement between them and the defendant Sigmund Romberg, dismissed the complaint.
Theodore B. Richter and Julius Henry Cohen for appellants.
Charles H. Tuttle and William Klein for respondents.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan and McLaughlin, JJ. Not voting: Crane, J.