Case Name: ROUX, Respondent, v. ROTHSCHILD, Appellant, et al.
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1903-01-16
Citations: 79 N.Y.S. 1145
Docket Number: 
Parties: ROUX, Respondent, v. ROTHSCHILD, Appellant, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 79
Pages: 1145–1145

Head Matter:
ROUX, Respondent, v. ROTHSCHILD, Appellant, et al.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
January 16, 1903.)
Action by Charles A. Roux against Emma Rothschild and another. From a judgment for plaintiff (75 N. Y. Supp. 763), the defendant Rothschild appeals. Affirmed.
Henry M. Stevenson, for appellant.
George W. Betts, Jr., for respondent.

Opinion:
INGRAHAM, J.
The question presented in this case is the same as that in Rothschild v. Roux (decided herewith) 79 N. Y. Supp. 833. The facts are stated in that case; this action being brought to set aside the powers of attorney and transfers of various installments of annuities to which the plaintiff xvas entitled under the will of his grandfather. For the reasons stated in the opinion in that case, the judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.