
    Arthur R. Bastine, Respondent, v. Webster B. Mabie, Appellant.
    
      Bastine v. Mabie, 172 App. Div. 954, affirmed.
    (Submitted October 24, 1918;
    decided November 12, 1918.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered February 24, 1916, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. Prior to the commencement of this action the partnership between the parties had been dissolved by mutual consent and an account rendered. This account took into consideration each and every item of the partnership business, except certain specified moneys alleged to have been received by the defendant. Thereafter this action was brought for an accounting of the partnership business and for judgment against the defendant for any sums received by him and not accounted .for. The defendant in his answer set forth as special defenses: First, that an account had been rendered between the parties, and second, that this action would only involve one item and that the plaintiff had an adequate remedy at law.
    
      Omri F. Hibbard, Nathan I. Sachs, Matthew Swerling and J. Bradley Tanner for appellant.
    
      Carlisle Norwood for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur': His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Collin, Cuddeback and Hogan, JJ. Not sitting: McLaughlin, J. Absent: Crane, J.  