Airflow Taxi Corp. v. C. I. T. Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Airflow Taxi Corp. v. C. I. T. Corp.

258 A.D. 857, 15 N.Y.S.2d 965

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedNovember 22, 1939

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 258 A.D. 857 (Airflow Taxi Corp. v. C. I. T. Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Airflow Taxi Corp. v. C. I. T. Corp., 258 A.D. 857, 15 N.Y.S.2d 965 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: Since the affidavits present triable issues of fact, particularly on the question as to whether or not the defendant ever sold the taxicabs, the motions for summary judgment were properly denied. (Dwan v. Massarene, 199 App. Div. 872; Friedman v. Universal Mercerizing Co., 238 id. 805.) The credibility of the affiants is for the jury. (Bernstein v. Kritzer, 224 App. Div. 387.) We are not required to and do not now pass upon the validity of the alleged agreement dated May 9,1938, and marked “ Exhibit B.” All concur. (The order denies defendant’s motion for summary judgment and denies plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party. Memorandum: Since the affidavits present triable issues of fact, particularly on the question as to whether or not the defendant ever sold the taxicabs, the motions for summary judgment were properly denied. (Dwan v. Massarene, 199 App. Div. 872; Friedman v. Universal Mercerizing Co., 238 id. 805.) The credibility of the affiants is for the jury. (Bernstein v. Kritzer, 224 App. Div. 387.) We are not required to and do not now pass upon the validity of the alleged agreement dated May 9,1938, and marked “ Exhibit B.” All concur. (The order denies defendant’s motion for summary judgment and denies plaintiff’s cross-motion for summary judgment.) Present — Sears, P. J., Crosby, Lewis, Taylor and Dowling, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 A.D. 857, 15 N.Y.S.2d 965, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/airflow-taxi-corp-v-c-i-t-corp-nyappdiv-1939.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack