Daniel Gale Associates, Inc. v. Fiance

225 A.D.2d 652, 639 N.Y.2d 937, 639 N.Y.S.2d 937, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2617
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 18, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 225 A.D.2d 652 (Daniel Gale Associates, Inc. v. Fiance) 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
Daniel Gale Associates, Inc. v. Fiance, 225 A.D.2d 652, 639 N.Y.2d 937, 639 N.Y.S.2d 937, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2617 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

We reject the appellants’ contention that the jury’s verdict was inconsistent. The first question posed to the jury was whether the plaintiff had earned a real estate commission for the sale of the property that is the subject of this appeal. The jury answered that question affirmatively, and in response to the remaining question, the jury determined the amount of the commission. There is no inconsistency in the jury’s answers to the questions that were posed to it.

We have considered the appellants’ remaining contentions [653]*653and find them to be without merit. Miller, J. P., Joy, Hart and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Goldman v. Hickory House Tenants Corp.
226 A.D.2d 675 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
225 A.D.2d 652, 639 N.Y.2d 937, 639 N.Y.S.2d 937, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2617, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-gale-associates-inc-v-fiance-nyappdiv-1996.