Case Name: CHRISTENFELD, Respondent, v. DAVIDSON et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1905-03-03
Citations: 92 N.Y.S. 1119
Docket Number: 
Parties: CHRISTENFELD, Respondent, v. DAVIDSON et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 92
Pages: 1119–1119

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.