The sole question presented on this appeal concerns the sufficiency of the proof of corporate existence. Such defect as existed has been obviated by proof presented on this appeal, ■and, being record evidence, is under the authorities admissible for the purpose of sustaining the judgment below. Dunford v. Weaver, 84 N. Y. 445; Munoz v. Wilson, 111 id. 299; Dunham v. Townshend, 118 id. 281; Bank of Charleston v. Emeric, 2 Sandf. 718. The judgment should be affirmed. -
Present: Freedman, P. J.; MacLean and Leventritt, JJ.
Judgment affirmed, with costs to respondent.