Case Name: VALENTI et al., Respondents, v. CONSTANTINE et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-07-26
Citations: 34 N.Y.S. 1150
Docket Number: 
Parties: VALENTI et al., Respondents, v. CONSTANTINE et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 34
Pages: 1150–1150

Head Matter:
VALENTI et al., Respondents, v. CONSTANTINE et al., Appellants.
(Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department.
July 26, 1895.)
Action by Orazio Valenti and another against Richard B. Constantine and another.
Moore, Wallace & Dudley, for appellant
Richard B. Constantine. A. C. Astarita, for respondents.;

Opinion:
PRATT, J.
We are of opinion that the referee's conclusions are sustained by the testimony. Not only was there considerable evidence that Constantine had personal notice of the work done by the plaintiffs, but it seems pretty well established that the tenant had authority to make repairs. He made them for some years, and, until the present instance, his authority was never questioned. There are no exceptions that require notice, and judgment is affirmed, with costs. All concur.