Case Name: John Nemeth, Inc., Respondent, v. William W. Tracy et al., Composing the Copartnership of Tracy & Co., Defendants. Frederick W. Parker, Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1916-04-11
Citations: 217 N.Y. 714
Docket Number: 
Parties: John Nemeth, Inc., Respondent, v. William W. Tracy et al., Composing the Copartnership of Tracy & Co., Defendants. Frederick W. Parker, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 217
Pages: 714–715

Head Matter:
John Nemeth, Inc., Respondent, v. William W. Tracy et al., Composing the Copartnership of Tracy & Co., Defendants. Frederick W. Parker, Appellant.
Nemeth, Inc., v. Tracy, 159 App. Div. 497, reversed.
(Argued March 13, 1916;
decided April 11, 1916.)
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 6, 1914, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover damages sustained by plaintiff by reason of false representations. in connection with the sale of certain bills of exchange. The evidence given upon the trial was sufficient to justify the jury in finding that the representations made to induce the purchase of the bills of exchange were fraudulent. The only question involved is as to the responsibility of the defendent Parker for the fraud of. his copartners. Parker’s own innocence of any fraud in fact was conceded at the trial. There is no evidence in the case to indicate that he had any knowledge of the fraud, or authorized or ratified the transactions connected with it. He did not upon the trial deny liability in contract, but founded his defense upon the ground that the action being for damages for false representations, the plaintiff' was bound to show that the representations were made by his authority, claiming that there was nothing in the course of the partnership business from which such an authority could be inferred.
Julian C. Harrison and De Witt V. D. Reiley for appellant.
Frederick T. Kelsey and Harries A. Mumma for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment reversed, new trial granted, costs to abide event, on dissenting opinion of Scott, J., below.
Concur: Willard Bartlett, Ch. J., Hiscock, Chase, Collin, Hogan and Seabury, JJ. Not sitting: Cardozo, J.