History
  • No items yet
midpage
Dooley v. Seaman
175 A.D. 903
N.Y. App. Div.
1916
Check Treatment

Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event. The jury was instructed, perhaps unnecessarily, that they must find an express contract. There was no evidence to prove such a contract. The verdict cannot stand. Jenks, P. J., Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ., concurred; Rich, J., not voting.

Case Details

Case Name: Dooley v. Seaman
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Oct 15, 1916
Citation: 175 A.D. 903
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.