Brinkman v. Eisler

City of New York Municipal Court

Brinkman v. Eisler

16 N.Y.S. 154, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 865, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 364

CourtCity of New York Municipal Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1891

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 16 N.Y.S. 154 (Brinkman v. Eisler) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Brinkman v. Eisler, 16 N.Y.S. 154, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 865, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 364 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Ehrlich, C. J.

We agree with the learned judge who tried the cause that where a person agrees to do an unlawful act, and incurs expense, he cannot recover, either on the illegal contract or for a quantum meruit, for the law leaves the parties where they place themselves. The authorities hold that a structure such as the plaintiff undertook to erect is illegal and in the nature of a nuisance. See Trenor v. Jackson, 15 Abb. Pr. (N. S.) 115; and on the subject, generally, see Telegraph Co. v. Hess, 125 N. Y. 641, 26 N. E. Rep. 919; Lahr v. Railroad Co., 104 N. Y. 268, 10 N. E. Rep. 528; Story v. Railroad Co., 90 N. Y. 122; Callanan v. Gilman, 67 How. Pr. 464, 107 N. Y. 360, 14 N. E. Rep. 264; Clifford v. Dam, 81 N. Y. 52; Knowlton v. Spring Co., 57 N. Y. 518; Materne v. Horwitz, 101 N. Y. 469, 5 N. E. Rep. 331; Foley v. Speir, 100 N. Y. 552, 3 N. E. Rep. 477; Goodrich v. Houghton, (Sup.) 9 N. Y. Supp. 214; Arnot v. Coal Co., 68 N. Y. 558; Pease v. Walsh, 39 N. Y. Super. Ct. 514; McDonough v. City of Brooklyn, 1 Wkly. Dig. 390; Archer v. McDonald, 86 Hun, 194; Booth v. Mills Co., 60 N. Y. 487; New York, etc., R. Co. v. Standard Oil Co., 87 N. Y. 486; Tompkins v. Dudley, 25 N. Y. 172; Farrell v. Mayor, etc., (Sup.) 5 N. Y. Supp. 672; Anderson v. Equitable G. L. Co., 12 Daly, 462; Cohen v. Mayor, etc., 113 N. Y. 532, 21 N. E. Rep. 700. For these reasons, and those assigned by the trial judge on making the order appealed from, the order must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

Ehrlich, C. J.

We agree with the learned judge who tried the cause that where a person agrees to do an unlawful act, and incurs expense, he cannot recover, either on the illegal contract or for a quantum meruit, for the law leaves the parties where they place themselves. The authorities hold that a structure such as the plaintiff undertook to erect is illegal and in the nature of a nuisance. See Trenor v. Jackson, 15 Abb. Pr. (N. S.) 115; and on the subject, generally, see Telegraph Co. v. Hess, 125 N. Y. 641, 26 N. E. Rep. 919; Lahr v. Railroad Co., 104 N. Y. 268, 10 N. E. Rep. 528; Story v. Railroad Co., 90 N. Y. 122; Callanan v. Gilman, 67 How. Pr. 464, 107 N. Y. 360, 14 N. E. Rep. 264; Clifford v. Dam, 81 N. Y. 52; Knowlton v. Spring Co., 57 N. Y. 518; Materne v. Horwitz, 101 N. Y. 469, 5 N. E. Rep. 331; Foley v. Speir, 100 N. Y. 552, 3 N. E. Rep. 477; Goodrich v. Houghton, (Sup.) 9 N. Y. Supp. 214; Arnot v. Coal Co., 68 N. Y. 558; Pease v. Walsh, 39 N. Y. Super. Ct. 514; McDonough v. City of Brooklyn, 1 Wkly. Dig. 390; Archer v. McDonald, 86 Hun, 194; Booth v. Mills Co., 60 N. Y. 487; New York, etc., R. Co. v. Standard Oil Co., 87 N. Y. 486; Tompkins v. Dudley, 25 N. Y. 172; Farrell v. Mayor, etc., (Sup.) 5 N. Y. Supp. 672; Anderson v. Equitable G. L. Co., 12 Daly, 462; Cohen v. Mayor, etc., 113 N. Y. 532, 21 N. E. Rep. 700. For these reasons, and those assigned by the trial judge on making the order appealed from, the order must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 N.Y.S. 154, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 865, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 364, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brinkman-v-eisler-nynyccityct-1891.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack