Case Name: BARTON & SPOONER CO. v. GREY
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1910-02-18
Citations: 121 N.Y.S. 314
Docket Number: 
Parties: BARTON & SPOONER CO. v. GREY.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 121
Pages: 314–315

Head Matter:
BARTON & SPOONER CO. v. GREY.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
February 18, 1910.)
Contracts (§ 29 )—Actions for Compensation—Evidence.
Where the uncontradicted evidence showed that plaintiff was employed by defendant to insert certain advertisements in designated papers, which it did, and that defendant later promised to pay plaintiff when it paid the papers, which was done, a verdict for plaintiff was properly directed.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Contracts, Dec. Dig. § 29. ]
Lehman, J., dissenting.
Appeal from City Court of New York, Trial Term.
Action by the Barton & Spooner Company against Alonzo D. Grey. From a judgment for plaintiff, and an order denying a motion for new trial, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Argued before SEABURY, LEHMAN, and BIJUR, JJ.
Eredk. F. Eisemann (Jerome Eisner, of counsel), for appellant.
Flammer & Flammer, for respondent.
For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & RepT Indexes

Opinion:
SEABURY, J.
The plaintiff sues to recover for services performed at the request of the defendant. The services consisted in causing certain advertisements to be inserted in two newspapers. The plaintiff proved its employment by the defendant and that it caused the advertisements to be inserted in the newspapers designated. The plaintiff also proved a conversation with the defendant in which the latter stated that he would pay the plaintiff the amount claimed as soon as the plaintiff had paid the newspapers. As a matter of fact the plaintiff did pay the newspapers before this action was, commenced. The defendant called no witnesses, and none of the evidence recited above was contradicted. Upon this proof I think that the learned court below properly directed a verdict for the plaintiff.
The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.