Brown v. Rosenbaum

259 A.D. 304, 19 N.Y.S.2d 416, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6129
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 19, 1940·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment should be reversed because no identified shares of stock were allocated to the defendant’s contract of purchase until after the failure of the Harriman National Bank and Trust Company. (Broderick v. Aaron [Rice], 264 N. Y. 368; Broderick v. Adamson [Greif], 270 id. 260.) We have concluded, however, to order a new trial rather than to dismiss the complaint for the reason that this question may not have been sufficiently raised and adequately litigated at the trial. (See Persky v. Bank of America National Association, 261 N. Y. 212.)

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present — Martin, P. J., Glennon, Untermyer, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.

Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

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

Brown v. Rosenbaum, 259 A.D. 304, 19 N.Y.S.2d 416, 1940 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6129 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1940).

259 A.D. 304 (Brown v. Rosenbaum) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lichtenstein v. Montefiore Hospital & Medical Center
56 A.D.2d 281 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)
Brown v. Rosenbaum
262 A.D. 136 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1941)
Brown v. Rosenbaum
175 Misc. 295 (New York Supreme Court, 1940)