
    WEINKRANTZ v. HUMBOLDT LIBRARY.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    June 28, 1900.)
    Appeal and Error—Judgment for Plaintiff—Quantum Meruit—Excuse for Nonperformance—Work Stopped by Defendant.
    Where plaintiff recovered, on a quantum meruit, under a contract to do certain work on books, error predicated on the fact that he failed to show an excuse for nonperformance of the balance of the contract would not he reviewed on appeal, where the evidence tended to show that defendant stopped the work himself.
    Appeal from municipal court of city of New York.
    Action by Samuel Weinkrantz against the Humboldt Library for services. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before TRUAX, P. J., and SCOTT and DUGRO, JJ.
    Alden & Carpenter, for appellant.
    Maurice B. Blumenthal, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

As the appellant’s only point is that the plaintiff failed to prove any excuse for his nonperformance of the contracts that would entitle him to recover for his services on the unfinished books, and as the evidence, tends to show that work upon the contract of October 6th was stopped by the defendant, the judgment is affirmed, with costs.  