
    John Lees, Respondent, v. Nathan Ritterman, Appellant.
    (New York Common Pleas—Additional General Term,
    August, 1894.)
    To sustain a recovery against a party by reason of an order of the board of health, there must be legal evidence of the malting of such order by that board. The mere service of notice is no legal proof of the action of the board.
    Appeal from a judgment of the District Court of the city of Rew York for the second judicial district.
    
      
      C. Cohn, for appellant.
    
      John Callahan, for respondent.
   Per Curiam.

If it is sought to make a party liable by-reason of an order of the board of health, there must be legal evidence of the making of such order by that board. The mere service of notice is no legal proof of the action of the board. No other proof than the service of notice was offered in this action, which is not sufficient in this case to make the appellant liable to do the work required by the board.

For this reason the judgment must be reversed and a new-trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present: Bookstaver and Bisohoff, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to-appellant to abide event.  