Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York March 7, 1902 (In re McGuinness)

PER CURIAM.

Without dissenting from the conclusion reached by the learned judge at special term, “that the respondents acted with entire honesty in their dealings with the petitioner,” we do not concur in his view that they were responsible only for the amount they retained of the $500, and should not be answerable for the portion thereof which they paid to Welch.