From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

ARFMAN v. HARE

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Apr 1, 1899
27 Misc. 777 (N.Y. App. Term 1899)

Opinion

April, 1899.

Betts, Betts, Sheffield Betts, for appellant.

Wendt Berry, for respondent.


This action was brought to recover damages for the alleged breach of warranty in the sale of a horse. The court below by its judgment decided all disputed questions of fact in favor of the plaintiff. The court had a right to pass upon all questions of fact and its conclusion in this case cannot be said to be clearly against the weight of evidence. It must be assumed that the court decided that this defendant, at the time the mare in question was offered for sale, and struck off to the plaintiff, represented and warranted her to be sound.

The defendant must be treated under all the facts and circumstances of this case as having been the agent for the real owner, and having failed, as was determined by the trial court, to disclose his principal, he is, therefore, liable in damages for such breach of warranty. Argersinger v. Macnaughton, 114 N.Y. 535; Cabre v. Sturges, 1 Hilt. 160.

Judgment must, therefore, be affirmed, with costs.

MacLEAN and LEVENTRITT, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to the respondent.


Summaries of

ARFMAN v. HARE

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Apr 1, 1899
27 Misc. 777 (N.Y. App. Term 1899)
Case details for

ARFMAN v. HARE

Case Details

Full title:JOHN W. ARFMAN, Respondent, v . M.L. HARE, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Apr 1, 1899

Citations

27 Misc. 777 (N.Y. App. Term 1899)