
    WATER SUPERVISION COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. EMPIRE HOLDING COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
    May 26, 1916.)
    . Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, B'irst District. Judgment dismissing the complaint, and plaintiff appeals. Modified and affirmed.
   PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff sued for services rendered pursuant to a contract. It failed to prove that the contract was signed by a person thereto duly authorized by the defendant, or that it had been ratified, or even that any services had been rendered. The complaint was properly dismissed, but the dismissal should not have been on the merits. Judgment modified, by striking therefrom the words “upon the merits,” and as so modified, affirmed, without costs of the appeal to either party. All concur.  