Bernstein v. Goldsticker

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bernstein v. Goldsticker

188 A.D. 933

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 15, 1919·Published

Opinion

The jurisdiction to require defendant to convey in fee for the consideration agreed, less an abatement for the calculated value of the dower right, is now settled. (Bostwick v. Beach, 103 N. Y. 414; Maas v. Morgenthaler, 136 App. Div. 359.) Having taken jurisdiction to enforce plaintiff’s lien as vendee for payment of part purchase money, the equity court could go on and decree money damages as an alternative to taking such a deed from the husband only, with such dower right outstanding. The judgment is, therefore, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Jenks, P. J., Putnam, Blackmar, Kelly and Jayeox, JJ.

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

The jurisdiction to require defendant to convey in fee for the consideration agreed, less an abatement for the calculated value of the dower right, is now settled. (Bostwick v. Beach, 103 N. Y. 414; Maas v. Morgenthaler, 136 App. Div. 359.) Having taken jurisdiction to enforce plaintiff’s lien as vendee for payment of part purchase money, the equity court could go on and decree money damages as an alternative to taking such a deed from the husband only, with such dower right outstanding. The judgment is, therefore, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Jenks, P. J., Putnam, Blackmar, Kelly and Jayeox, JJ.

Bernstein v. Goldsticker, 188 A.D. 933 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1919).

Pincite

188 A.D. 933 (Bernstein v. Goldsticker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related