
    Arnold, appellant, v. Dusenbury.
    
      Evidence — of payment—checks upon ba/nk.
    
    Defendant' contracted with P. to move a building at a specified price. P. employed plaintiff to do the work and made certain payments therefor. Plaintiff, claiming that during the progress of the work defendant agreed to become responsible to him for his services, brought action for a balance claimed to be due. At the trial it was shown that from time to time P. had given plaintiff orders upon defendant for certain sums. Meld, that checks given by defendant to P. were admissible as evidence of the payment of the amounts specified, and in connection with the orders were material to explain time, manner and circumstances under which defendant paid moneys to plaintiff. „
    
      Appeal from a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon the report of a referee. The action was brought in Westchester county by Aaron Arnold against Daniel Dusenbury, to recover for services in moving a building belonging to defendant. The defense was that defendant made the contract for removal with one Purdy, who ‘employed plaintiff to do the work, and that Purdy had been paid in full.
    
      G. Frost, for appellant.
    
      Glose & Robertson, for respondent.
   Talcott, J..

The only point of any importance whatever in the opinion is fully given in the head-note.

Judgment affirmed.  