| N.Y. App. Div. | Jul 15, 1925
Plaintiff’s only cause of action is in tort, and is governed by the laws of Peru. There is no presumption that the law of Peru is the same as our common law. (Cuba R. R. Co. v. Crosby, 222 U.S. 473" date_filed="1912-01-09" court="SCOTUS" case_name="Cuba Railroad v. Crosby">222 U. S. 473; Mexican Cent. R. Co. v. Chantry, 136 F. 316" date_filed="1905-01-10" court="5th Cir." case_name="Mexican Cent. Ry. Co. v. Chantry">136 Fed. 316; Oehler v. Hamburg-American Line, 84 Misc. 272" date_filed="1914-02-15" court="N.Y. Sup. Ct." case_name="Oehler v. Hamburg-American Line">84 Misc. 272.) There was no evidence offered as to the law of Peru. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Kelly, P. J., Rich, Jaycox, Kelby and Kapper, JJ.