From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bullwinkel v. Firor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 1, 1928
222 App. Div. 814 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)

Opinion

January, 1928

Present — Lazansky, P.J., Rich, Kapper, Seeger and Carswell, JJ.


Judgment and order denying motion to set aside verdict unanimously affirmed, with costs. The record does not establish an illegal contract, as matter of law. Plaintiff's connection with the corporation was solely as the representative of Schott Galliver. He owned no stock in and received no salary from the corporation. He was out of his titular capacity before defendant's election. The defendant's selection as president was solely that of the bankers' syndicate. If there were any doubt about it the defendant should have requested the court to submit the proposition to the jury. No such request was made and the charge was acceptable to the defense. We hold the foregoing without meaning to intimate that, in the circumstances, a finding, as matter of fact, that plaintiff's agreement with the defendant was void, could be regarded as supported by the evidence.


Summaries of

Bullwinkel v. Firor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 1, 1928
222 App. Div. 814 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)
Case details for

Bullwinkel v. Firor

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD J. BULLWINKEL, Respondent, v. FRANK M. FIROR, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jan 1, 1928

Citations

222 App. Div. 814 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)