Case Name: August Keuthen, Appellant, v. Jefferson D. Bremer and Charles E. Ring, Copartners Doing Business as "Bremer, Fiske & Ring," as Attorneys in-Fact of and Representing Henry Altenbrand and Others, as Underwriters, Doing Business under the Name or Style of "New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City," Defendants. New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City, Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1909-11
Citations: 134 A.D. 959
Docket Number: 
Parties: August Keuthen, Appellant, v. Jefferson D. Bremer and Charles E. Ring, Copartners Doing Business as “Bremer, Fiske & Ring,” as Attorneys in-Fact of and Representing Henry Altenbrand and Others, as Underwriters, Doing Business under the Name or Style of “New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City,” Defendants. New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 134
Pages: 959–959

Head Matter:
August Keuthen, Appellant, v. Jefferson D. Bremer and Charles E. Ring, Copartners Doing Business as “Bremer, Fiske & Ring,” as Attorneys in-Fact of and Representing Henry Altenbrand and Others, as Underwriters, Doing Business under the Name or Style of “New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City,” Defendants. New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City, Respondent.
Judgment—pleadings—when judgment against indimd,uals.
‘ Appeal from an order entered in the New York county clerk’s office on the 5th day of August, 1909, striking out the words “As Underwriters doing business under the name or style ‘ New York and New England' Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City,’ ” from the judgment herein.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
The judgment follows the pleadings, and in both the parties for whom Bremer and Ring acted are correctly described as "Underwriters* doing business under the name or style ' New York and New England Underwriters at Lloyds of New York City.'" The judgment is in form one against certain individuals and not against an association, incorporated or not. We are not concerned with the effect that some other court may give such a judgment. The order appealed from must be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Present—Ingraham, Laughlin, Clarke, Houghton and Scott, JJ. Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.