City of New York Municipal Court, 1894

Waldheim v. Sonnenstrahl

Waldheim v. Sonnenstrahl
City of New York Municipal Court · Decided February 8, 1894 · Fitzsimons
27 N.Y.S. 1133; 57 N.Y. St. Rep. 873 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Hayes & Greenbaum, for appellant., Simpson & Werner, for respondent.

Waldheim v. Sonnenstrahl

Opinion of the Court

FITZSIMONS, J.

The plaintiff’s testimony certainly shows that he failed* to comply with the covenant in the guaranty, which provided that defendant should be notified, by postal card, if Ginns did not pay five dollars each week, on account of the goods sold; but the testimony also shows that defendant,, after Ginn’s default, waived that provision; therefore, the judgment was-* right, and must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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