Belmont Homes, Inc. v. Kreutzer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Belmont Homes, Inc. v. Kreutzer

6 A.D.2d 697, 174 N.Y.S.2d 310, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5966

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

DecidedMay 12, 1958

StatusPublished

This text of 6 A.D.2d 697 (Belmont Homes, Inc. v. Kreutzer) 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

Belmont Homes, Inc. v. Kreutzer, 6 A.D.2d 697, 174 N.Y.S.2d 310, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5966 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for (1) a judgment declaring unauthorized a resolution with respect to the construction of water facilities in a new development and the charges established by the resolution unenforcible, (2) an injunction against the enforcement of the resolution, and (3) for an accounting of money deposited, a judgment was entered after trial granting a limited accounting but dismissing the complaint in all other respects. The appeal is from so much of the judgment as dismissed the complaint “in all other respects”. Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimously affirmed, with costs. In our opinion plaintiff was not coerced in entering into the agreement but did so voluntarily and, having benefited therefrom, is estopped from questioning its validity. (Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of City of New York v. Sonneborn, 113 N. Y. 423; City of Buffalo v. Balcom, 134 N. Y. 532; City of New York v. Delli Paoli, 202 N. Y. 18.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ.

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

In an action for (1) a judgment declaring unauthorized a resolution with respect to the construction of water facilities in a new development and the charges established by the resolution unenforcible, (2) an injunction against the enforcement of the resolution, and (3) for an accounting of money deposited, a judgment was entered after trial granting a limited accounting but dismissing the complaint in all other respects. The appeal is from so much of the judgment as dismissed the complaint “in all other respects”. Judgment insofar as appealed from unanimously affirmed, with costs. In our opinion plaintiff was not coerced in entering into the agreement but did so voluntarily and, having benefited therefrom, is estopped from questioning its validity. (Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty of City of New York v. Sonneborn, 113 N. Y. 423; City of Buffalo v. Balcom, 134 N. Y. 532; City of New York v. Delli Paoli, 202 N. Y. 18.) Present — Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Murphy, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.2d 697, 174 N.Y.S.2d 310, 1958 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5966, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/belmont-homes-inc-v-kreutzer-nyappdiv-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack