Columbia Wax Products Co. v. Klahn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Columbia Wax Products Co. v. Klahn

29 A.D.2d 560, 286 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2689

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

DecidedDecember 20, 1967

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 29 A.D.2d 560 (Columbia Wax Products Co. v. Klahn) 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

Columbia Wax Products Co. v. Klahn, 29 A.D.2d 560, 286 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2689 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for injury to property, defendant Klahn and the other defendants (hereinafter called Gordon) separately appeal as follows from an amended and corrected judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered April 12, 1967, in favor of plaintiffs against all the defendants and in favor of the Gordon defendants against defendant Klahn on the cross claim of the Gordon defendants: Defendant Klahn appeals from the entire judgment and the Gordon defendants appeal from so much of the judgment as is in favor of plaintiffs against them. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and new trial granted on the limited issue of damages. In our opinion, the proof allegedly sustaining the amount of the awards was highly unsatisfactory (cf. Deutseh v. National Props., 19 A D 2d 823; 1 New York Law of Damages, § 435; Steitz v. Gifford, 280 N. Y. 15, 20). But, aside from the unsatisfactory proof as to damages, there was ample proof which would have justified a judgment in favor of plaintiffs against all the defendants and a judgment on the cross claim in favor of the Gordon defendants. In the circumstances herein, a new trial on the limited issue of damages is appropriate (cf. Deutseh v. National Props., supra). Beldock, P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for injury to property, defendant Klahn and the other defendants (hereinafter called Gordon) separately appeal as follows from an amended and corrected judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered April 12, 1967, in favor of plaintiffs against all the defendants and in favor of the Gordon defendants against defendant Klahn on the cross claim of the Gordon defendants: Defendant Klahn appeals from the entire judgment and the Gordon defendants appeal from so much of the judgment as is in favor of plaintiffs against them. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, without costs, and new trial granted on the limited issue of damages. In our opinion, the proof allegedly sustaining the amount of the awards was highly unsatisfactory (cf. Deutseh v. National Props., 19 A D 2d 823; 1 New York Law of Damages, § 435; Steitz v. Gifford, 280 N. Y. 15, 20). But, aside from the unsatisfactory proof as to damages, there was ample proof which would have justified a judgment in favor of plaintiffs against all the defendants and a judgment on the cross claim in favor of the Gordon defendants. In the circumstances herein, a new trial on the limited issue of damages is appropriate (cf. Deutseh v. National Props., supra). Beldock, P. J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 560, 286 N.Y.S.2d 1015, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2689, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/columbia-wax-products-co-v-klahn-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack