Case Name: Frances Marks, Trading as Paradise Paint & Wallpaper Company, Respondent, v. Cornwall Shipbuilding Co., Inc., et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1943-10-25
Citations: 181 Misc. 7
Docket Number: 
Parties: Frances Marks, Trading as Paradise Paint & Wallpaper Company, Respondent, v. Cornwall Shipbuilding Co., Inc., et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 181
Pages: 7–8

Head Matter:
Frances Marks, Trading as Paradise Paint & Wallpaper Company, Respondent, v. Cornwall Shipbuilding Co., Inc., et al., Appellants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department,
October 25, 1943.
Arthur J. Homans and Alexander Blumenthal for appellants.
Hyman Borman for respondent.

Opinion:
Memorándum
Per Curiam.
Judgment unanimously reversed on the facts and new trial granted, with costs to defendants to abide the event.
In the absence of any explanation by plaintiff of the written charge for a Smith moulder after the alleged agreement for substitution of an American moulder, the decision for plaintiff was against the weight of the evidence. Plaintiff's contention that the City Court had no jurisdiction of the counterclaim is answered by section 18 of the New York City Court Act (L. 1926, ch. 539; amd. L. 1936, ch. 324).
MacCrate, McCooey and Steinbrink, JJ., concur.