Class-Wheeler, Inc. v. Roma Contracting Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Class-Wheeler, Inc. v. Roma Contracting Corp.

8 A.D.2d 939, 190 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7680

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 6, 1959

StatusPublished

This text of 8 A.D.2d 939 (Class-Wheeler, Inc. v. Roma Contracting Corp.) 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

Class-Wheeler, Inc. v. Roma Contracting Corp., 8 A.D.2d 939, 190 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7680 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1959).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeals (1) by the judgment debtor, from so much of an order of the City Court of Yonkers as allows in part a Deputy Marshal’s claim in the total amount of $2,687 for expenses allegedly incurred for moving, storage, and repair of property in his custody pursuant to levy upon issuance of an execution on a judgment in the amount of $2,105.50, and (2) by the judgment creditor and Deputy Marshal (as limited by their brief), from so much of said order as disallows in part said claim. Order modified (a) by striking from .the first ordering paragraph everything beginning with the words “ disallowed as ” and ending with the figure “ $873.50 ” and by substituting therefor the words and figures “ allowed in the amount of $247.60 of which amount, fifty (50%) per cent thereof, or $123.80 ”, and (b) by striking from the second ordering paragraph the figures “ $873.50 ” and “ $421.50 ” and by substituting therefor the figures “ $123.80 ” and “ $1,171.20 ” respectively. As so modified, order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements, payable by respondents-appellants to appellant-respondent. No proof at all was offered in support of the claim of the Deputy Marshal of reasonable expense necessarily incurred by him (Nestor v. Bischoff, 123 N. Y. 517, 519; Waite v. Kaldenberg Co., 19 App. Div. 379, 380; Depew v. Solomonowitz, 48 App. Div. 512, 513, 514). On the contrary it was shown that the Deputy Marshal knew nothing at all about the alleged expenses as he had permitted an officer of the judgment creditor carte blanche in the disposition of the property. The allowance of $247.60 is granted because the judgment debtor, on this appeal has conceded that that sum was reasonable for transportation of the seized equipment to the place of storage. Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Murphy, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

Appeals (1) by the judgment debtor, from so much of an order of the City Court of Yonkers as allows in part a Deputy Marshal’s claim in the total amount of $2,687 for expenses allegedly incurred for moving, storage, and repair of property in his custody pursuant to levy upon issuance of an execution on a judgment in the amount of $2,105.50, and (2) by the judgment creditor and Deputy Marshal (as limited by their brief), from so much of said order as disallows in part said claim. Order modified (a) by striking from .the first ordering paragraph everything beginning with the words “ disallowed as ” and ending with the figure “ $873.50 ” and by substituting therefor the words and figures “ allowed in the amount of $247.60 of which amount, fifty (50%) per cent thereof, or $123.80 ”, and (b) by striking from the second ordering paragraph the figures “ $873.50 ” and “ $421.50 ” and by substituting therefor the figures “ $123.80 ” and “ $1,171.20 ” respectively. As so modified, order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements, payable by respondents-appellants to appellant-respondent. No proof at all was offered in support of the claim of the Deputy Marshal of reasonable expense necessarily incurred by him (Nestor v. Bischoff, 123 N. Y. 517, 519; Waite v. Kaldenberg Co., 19 App. Div. 379, 380; Depew v. Solomonowitz, 48 App. Div. 512, 513, 514). On the contrary it was shown that the Deputy Marshal knew nothing at all about the alleged expenses as he had permitted an officer of the judgment creditor carte blanche in the disposition of the property. The allowance of $247.60 is granted because the judgment debtor, on this appeal has conceded that that sum was reasonable for transportation of the seized equipment to the place of storage. Nolan, P. J., Wenzel, Murphy, Hallinan and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 A.D.2d 939, 190 N.Y.S.2d 505, 1959 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/class-wheeler-inc-v-roma-contracting-corp-nyappdiv-1959.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack