Blumenstein-Jacobsohn v. Wolf

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Blumenstein-Jacobsohn v. Wolf

8 A.D.2d 780, 186 N.Y.S.2d 528, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8217

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

DecidedJune 9, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.2d 780 (Blumenstein-Jacobsohn v. Wolf) 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

Blumenstein-Jacobsohn v. Wolf, 8 A.D.2d 780, 186 N.Y.S.2d 528, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8217 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed on the law and in the exercise of discretion, without costs to either party. On the argument of this appeal counsel for the respondent frankly stated his view that all matters relevant to the issue of the validity of the release, which occurred subsequent to the death of Joseph Blumenstein would properly be admissible on a separate trial of the affirmative defense of release. In our view, particularly in light of the statement made, all matters having to do with the relationship of the parties, the nature thereof — whether or not fiduciary — the amount of the settlement, whether there was in fact overreaching, and details similarly relevant may properly be explored upon the separate trial. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Stevens and Bergan, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed on the law and in the exercise of discretion, without costs to either party. On the argument of this appeal counsel for the respondent frankly stated his view that all matters relevant to the issue of the validity of the release, which occurred subsequent to the death of Joseph Blumenstein would properly be admissible on a separate trial of the affirmative defense of release. In our view, particularly in light of the statement made, all matters having to do with the relationship of the parties, the nature thereof — whether or not fiduciary — the amount of the settlement, whether there was in fact overreaching, and details similarly relevant may properly be explored upon the separate trial. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Stevens and Bergan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.2d 780, 186 N.Y.S.2d 528, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8217, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blumenstein-jacobsohn-v-wolf-nyappdiv-1959.