Central Laundry & Supply Co. v. Lee

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Central Laundry & Supply Co. v. Lee

257 A.D. 1040, 13 N.Y.S.2d 802, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8993

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 28, 1939·Published

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Giving to plaintiff the benefit of every reasonable inference to be drawn from evidence offered to prove defendant's breach of a restrictive covenant in the contract in suit, we do not find proof sufficient to establish the cause of action pleaded. We also take into consideration the fact that the evidence offered by the plaintiff established no damage. All concur, except Dowling, J., who dissents and votes for reversal on the law and for granting a new trial. (The judgment dismisses the complaint in an action to recover damages for breach of a contract.) Present — Sears, P, J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Dowling, JJ.

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

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Giving to plaintiff the benefit of every reasonable inference to be drawn from evidence offered to prove defendant's breach of a restrictive covenant in the contract in suit, we do not find proof sufficient to establish the cause of action pleaded. We also take into consideration the fact that the evidence offered by the plaintiff established no damage. All concur, except Dowling, J., who dissents and votes for reversal on the law and for granting a new trial. (The judgment dismisses the complaint in an action to recover damages for breach of a contract.) Present — Sears, P, J., Crosby, Lewis, Cunningham and Dowling, JJ.

Central Laundry & Supply Co. v. Lee, 257 A.D. 1040, 13 N.Y.S.2d 802, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8993 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

257 A.D. 1040 (Central Laundry & Supply Co. v. Lee) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.