Brandes v. Agnew

275 A.D.2d 843

This text of 275 A.D.2d 843 (Brandes v. Agnew) 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
Brandes v. Agnew, 275 A.D.2d 843 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1949).

Opinion

[844]*844There is no allegation in this complaint that defendant took title to this property without the consent or knowledge of the plaintiff, who paid the consideration, or that defendant purchased the property with money belonging to plaintiff in violation of some trust. (Real Property Law, § 94.) In the absence of such allegations, the property was, in legal effect, a gift to defendant. (Weigert v. Schlesinger, 150 App. Div. 765, affd. 210 N. Y. 573.) A cause of action for the return of such a gift may not he maintained even if the gift was obtained fraudulently. (Civ. Prac. Act, art. 2-A; Andie v. Kaplan, 288 N. Y. 685; Josephson v. Dry Dock Sav. Inst., 292 N. Y. 666.) Johnston, Acting P. J., Adel, Sneed, Wenzel and MacCrate, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Josephson v. Dry Dock Savings Institution, Mendez
56 N.E.2d 96 (New York Court of Appeals, 1944)
Weigert v. . Schlesinger
104 N.E. 1143 (New York Court of Appeals, 1914)
Andie v. Kaplan
43 N.E.2d 82 (New York Court of Appeals, 1942)
Weigert v. Schlesinger
150 A.D. 765 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
275 A.D.2d 843, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brandes-v-agnew-nyappdiv-1949.