From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Heidenreich v. Hirsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 1, 1903
85 App. Div. 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 1903)

Opinion

July Term, 1903.

William L. Mathot, for the appellant.

Samuel Sturtz, for the respondent.

Present — VAN BRUNT, P.J., O'BRIEN, INGRAHAM, McLAUGHLIN and HATCH, JJ.


The defendant admits that he collected money as agent of the plaintiff, but denies that he collected the amount alleged; admits that he deducted his compensation, but denies that he had failed to pay the balance due to the plaintiff. This conceded relation between the plaintiff and the defendant entitled the plaintiff to compel the defendant to account, and for that reason the plaintiff should not be required to specify the items of the moneys collected by the defendant for the plaintiff and for which the defendant has failed to account.

The order appealed from should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion denied, with ten dollars costs.


Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs.


Summaries of

Heidenreich v. Hirsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 1, 1903
85 App. Div. 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 1903)
Case details for

Heidenreich v. Hirsh

Case Details

Full title:JOHN HEIDENREICH, Appellant, v . SIMON HIRSH, Respondent

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

Date published: Jul 1, 1903

Citations

85 App. Div. 319 (N.Y. App. Div. 1903)
83 N.Y.S. 366

Citing Cases

United States Title Guaranty Co. v. Brown

been required to specify the names of the property owners from whom the defendant has collected money…

SIROTA v. ABKO PRODUCTS, INC

Plaintiff may not be required to furnish particulars in respect of matters upon which respondents have the…