Case Name: James N. Jarvie, Appellant, v. Christina Arbuckle and Charles A. Jamison, as Administrators, etc., of John Arbuckle, Deceased, and William A. Jamison, Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1914-06-05
Citations: 163 A.D. 208
Docket Number: 
Parties: James N. Jarvie, Appellant, v. Christina Arbuckle and Charles A. Jamison, as Administrators, etc., of John Arbuckle, Deceased, and William A. Jamison, Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 163
Pages: 208–208

Head Matter:
James N. Jarvie, Appellant, v. Christina Arbuckle and Charles A. Jamison, as Administrators, etc., of John Arbuckle, Deceased, and William A. Jamison, Respondents. (Action No. 2.)
Second Department,
June 5, 1914.
See head note in Jarvie v. Arbuckle, No. 1 (ante, p. 199).
Appeal by the plaintiff, James N. Jarvie, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendants, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 10th day of May, 1913, upon the verdict of a jury, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 27th day of May, 1913, denying plaintiff’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 10th day of May, 1913, granting defendants’ motion for an extra allowance.
Lewis H. Freedman [Adrian H. Larkin and Albert Stickney with him on the brief], for the appellant.
William N. Dykman, for the respondents.

Opinion:
Burr, J.:
The questions of fact in this case as to whether the sums due to the employees' of the Pittsburg house were obligations of the firm or a personal indebtedness of John Arbuckle, have been resolved by the verdict of the jury in favor of defendants, and the evidence fully sustains such finding. Within the authority of Jarvie v. Arbuckle, No. 1 (163 App. Div. 199), decided herewith, it follows that the judgment entered in this action in favor of defendants, and the orders denying the motion for a new trial and granting defendants' motion for an extra allowance, should be affirmed, with costs.
Jenks, P. J., Thomas, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred.
Judgment and orders affirmed, with costs.