From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Abramson v. Davis Gowns, Inc.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 24, 1926
128 Misc. 454 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)

Opinion

December 24, 1926.

Appeal from the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Ninth District.

Benjamin Barondess, for the appellant.

Judson D. Campbell, for the respondent.


The right to prove how much plaintiff, employee, had earned elsewhere during the term of his contract, after his dismissal from his position, is an essential and integral part of defendant's case, and the erroneous denial of its motion for an examination before trial left it without any practical means of reducing the amount of damages claimed by plaintiff. ( Handel v. Co-ed Dressmakers, Inc., 216 A.D. 838.)

Judgment and order reversed, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event, and motion granted. Examination to proceed at Part 1 of the Municipal Court, borough of Manhattan, Ninth District, on the 27th of December, 1926, at ten A.M.

All concur; present, BIJUR, O'MALLEY and LEVY, JJ.


Summaries of

Abramson v. Davis Gowns, Inc.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 24, 1926
128 Misc. 454 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)
Case details for

Abramson v. Davis Gowns, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:THEODORE ABRAMSON, Respondent, v. MRS. J. DAVIS GOWNS, INC., Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Dec 24, 1926

Citations

128 Misc. 454 (N.Y. App. Term 1926)
219 N.Y.S. 137

Citing Cases

Schwartz v. J.L. Taylor Co., Int'l Tailoring Co.

The burden is upon defendants to prove affirmatively that plaintiff had or might have obtained similar…

Clougherty v. Royal Insurance

The court in Pape citing Schroeder says that the holding there is not inconsistent with its own ruling, and…