Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1909

Parkus v. Credit Clearing House

Parkus v. Credit Clearing House
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 5, 1909 · Dayton
115 N.Y.S. 98 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Michael H. Wolfe, for appellant., Low & Carey, for respondent.

Parkus v. Credit Clearing House

Opinion of the Court

DAYTON, J.

This is an action to recover for services as stenographer, rendered upon the employment of an attorney retained and. paid by defendant. The attorney testified that with the consent of *99defendant’s representative plaintiff was engaged to take minutes in a certain proceeding. The value of the services is not questioned, nor was the attorney’s testimony corroborated. Defendant’s representative specifically denied the testimony of the attorney, and stated that defendant had in its employ a stenographer competent for the work, whom said attorney knew. Plaintiff failed to establish his cause of action by a preponderance of proof. See Sherry v. Proal, 125 App. Div. 508, 109 N. Y. Supp. 1008, approving Losee v. Morey, 57 Barb. 562.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.