Call v. Case

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Call v. Case

84 N.Y.S. 166

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 22, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 84 N.Y.S. 166 (Call v. Case) 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

Call v. Case, 84 N.Y.S. 166 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

FREEDMAN, P. J.

This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover for four months’ rental of an apartment under a lease made by the defendant expiring October i, 1902, the defendant having surrendered the premises prior to May 1, 1902, and having paid the rent up to that time. The making of the lease and the amount of unpaid rent was admitted, and the sole issues submitted to the jury were two, viz.: (1) Whether there was a constructive eviction by reason of the escape of smoke and sewer gas into the apartment; and (2) whether the lease was canceled by the plaintiff, and the premises surrendered at his request. These were questions of fact (Hall v. Irvin, 78 App. Div. 107, 79 N. Y. Supp. 614), and the testimony upon this question was conflicting, and the jury found in favor of the defendant. The testimony in the case contains 25 pages, and the charge of the judge 4, and not an objection or exception was taken by either party during the trial, or to any portion of the charge. The only exception appearing in the record is the one taken to the refusal of the trial judge to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, made by plaintiff’s counsel. Neither party made any request for the direction of a verdict, and there is not the slightest reason for claiming that the verdict is against the weight of evidence, and the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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

FREEDMAN, P. J.

This action was brought by the plaintiff to recover for four months’ rental of an apartment under a lease made by the defendant expiring October i, 1902, the defendant having surrendered the premises prior to May 1, 1902, and having paid the rent up to that time. The making of the lease and the amount of unpaid rent was admitted, and the sole issues submitted to the jury were two, viz.: (1) Whether there was a constructive eviction by reason of the escape of smoke and sewer gas into the apartment; and (2) whether the lease was canceled by the plaintiff, and the premises surrendered at his request. These were questions of fact (Hall v. Irvin, 78 App. Div. 107, 79 N. Y. Supp. 614), and the testimony upon this question was conflicting, and the jury found in favor of the defendant. The testimony in the case contains 25 pages, and the charge of the judge 4, and not an objection or exception was taken by either party during the trial, or to any portion of the charge. The only exception appearing in the record is the one taken to the refusal of the trial judge to set aside the verdict and for a new trial, made by plaintiff’s counsel. Neither party made any request for the direction of a verdict, and there is not the slightest reason for claiming that the verdict is against the weight of evidence, and the judgment must be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.Y.S. 166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/call-v-case-nyappterm-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack