12 Abb. Pr. 252 | The Superior Court of New York City | 1871
J, [After discussing certain exceptions to the admission of evidence which he held to be not well taken.]—This brings up the main question of law involved in the case, which is presented chiefly by the exceptions of the defendant taken to the refusal of the court to charge certain requests, namely, whether plaintiff, in the performance • of the services rendered, was or was not a servant within the true intent and meaning of section 18 of the statute referred to, which provides that the stockholders of any company organized under the provisions of said act, “shall be jointly and severally individually liable for all debts that may be due and owing to all their laborers, servants and apprentices for services performed for such
The judgment and order appealed from must be severally affirmed, with costs.
Present, Barbour, Ch. J., and Freedman and Spencer, JJ.