Rathborne v. Hatch

Full title: Charles L. Rathborne, Respondent, v. Edward Hatch, Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 1, 1902

68 App. Div. 633 (N.Y. App. Div. 1902)

Opinion

January Term, 1902.

Present — Van Brunt, P.J., O'Brien, Ingraham, McLaughlin and Hatch, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

PER CURIAM:

The question of the sufficiency of the complaint was not raised at Special Term, and was not, therefore, passed upon. We have, however, examined the complaint and think it states a good cause of action. It is not contended by the appellant that the decision of the Special Term holding the counterclaim to be bad is erroneous, and it, therefore, follows that the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.