Boyajian v. Kelly

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Boyajian v. Kelly

29 Misc. 766, 61 N.Y.S. 1132

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 15, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 29 Misc. 766 (Boyajian v. Kelly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Boyajian v. Kelly, 29 Misc. 766, 61 N.Y.S. 1132 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Freedmaet, P. J.

This action was brought to recover for broker’s commissions in procuring a loan of $24,000 upon premises owned by the defendant. The defense was that, the plaintiff agreed to procure the loan for the sum of $340, which amount was to cover broker’s fees, attorney’s fees and disbursements.

The defendant showed that he had paid the attorney’s fees and disbursements amounting to the sum of $330.95, leaving the sum of $9.05 due the plaintiff, for which he had a judgment.

The record presents purely a question of fact, which the trial judge decided in favor of the defendant’s contention, and there is ample evidence to support that finding. Some criticism has [767]*767been made by the appellant’s counsel in their brief regarding the admission of certain testimony objected to by them. An examination of the record does not disclose error that would warrant a disturbance of the judgment in view of all the facts and circumstances shown, nor does it appear that injustice has been done.

MaoLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

Freedmaet, P. J.

This action was brought to recover for broker’s commissions in procuring a loan of $24,000 upon premises owned by the defendant. The defense was that, the plaintiff agreed to procure the loan for the sum of $340, which amount was to cover broker’s fees, attorney’s fees and disbursements.

The defendant showed that he had paid the attorney’s fees and disbursements amounting to the sum of $330.95, leaving the sum of $9.05 due the plaintiff, for which he had a judgment.

The record presents purely a question of fact, which the trial judge decided in favor of the defendant’s contention, and there is ample evidence to support that finding. Some criticism has [767]*767been made by the appellant’s counsel in their brief regarding the admission of certain testimony objected to by them. An examination of the record does not disclose error that would warrant a disturbance of the judgment in view of all the facts and circumstances shown, nor does it appear that injustice has been done.

MaoLean and Leventritt, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 Misc. 766, 61 N.Y.S. 1132, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boyajian-v-kelly-nyappterm-1899.