B. W. King, Inc. v. McAulay

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

B. W. King, Inc. v. McAulay

24 A.D.2d 444, 260 N.Y.S.2d 995, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3746

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

DecidedJune 29, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 24 A.D.2d 444 (B. W. King, Inc. v. McAulay) 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

B. W. King, Inc. v. McAulay, 24 A.D.2d 444, 260 N.Y.S.2d 995, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3746 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and the facts to grant plaintiffs an accounting for the profits of defendants’ business in respect to displacement measurement, and as so modified, affirmed, with $50 costs to plaintiffs-respondents-appellants. In this action to enjoin defendants from engaging in the displacement measuring business for scows and barges, we agree with the factual findings of the trial court and that the injunctive provisions of the judgment were well warranted by the proof. However, those same findings also entitle plaintiffs to an accounting for the profits of the business that was wrongfully diverted from them to the defendants (Defler Corp. v. Kleeman, 19 A D 2d 396; Bates Chevrolet Corp. [445]*445v. Haven Chevrolet, 13 A D 2d 27). Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Yalente, McNally, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously modified on the law and the facts to grant plaintiffs an accounting for the profits of defendants’ business in respect to displacement measurement, and as so modified, affirmed, with $50 costs to plaintiffs-respondents-appellants. In this action to enjoin defendants from engaging in the displacement measuring business for scows and barges, we agree with the factual findings of the trial court and that the injunctive provisions of the judgment were well warranted by the proof. However, those same findings also entitle plaintiffs to an accounting for the profits of the business that was wrongfully diverted from them to the defendants (Defler Corp. v. Kleeman, 19 A D 2d 396; Bates Chevrolet Corp. [445]*445v. Haven Chevrolet, 13 A D 2d 27). Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Yalente, McNally, Stevens and Steuer, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 444, 260 N.Y.S.2d 995, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3746, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/b-w-king-inc-v-mcaulay-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack