Case Name: FREYER, Respondent, v. VAN MAASDYK, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1905-05-23
Citations: 94 N.Y.S. 1146
Docket Number: 
Parties: FREYER, Respondent, v. VAN MAASDYK, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 94
Pages: 1146–1146

Head Matter:
FREYER, Respondent, v. VAN MAASDYK, Appellant.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
May 23, 1905.)
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Third District. ■ Action by Adolph Freyer against Eugene Van Maasdyk. From a judgment for plaintiff,' defendant appeals.
Reversed.
Herbert F. Andrews, for
appellant. Morris I. Price, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The evidence of the services rendered by the plaintiff to the defendant and of the value of those services is of the very slightest nature, and does n,ot warrant the judgment. Plaintiff is not entitled to receive compensation for what he did in the matter of the Nadison Manufacturing Company. He was the attorney for that company according to his own statement, and all that he appears to have done was to tell his client that it should pay its debts. Moreover, the weight of evidence is in favor of the defendant's contention that the plaintiff has been paid in full. Judgment is reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.