Darrow Associates Corp. v. Schneider

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Darrow Associates Corp. v. Schneider

49 A.D.2d 723, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10659

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

DecidedSeptember 25, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.2d 723 (Darrow Associates Corp. v. Schneider) 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

Darrow Associates Corp. v. Schneider, 49 A.D.2d 723, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10659 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered January 8, 1975, after trial to the court without a jury, unanimously affirmed, with $60 costs and disbursements to respondent. Though the suit was brought against others as well, under several causes for failure properly to renovate a building, only one cause was sustained, and properly so, against the individual defendant-appellant. That cause was for conversion of moneys paid over to a corporation of which defendant-appellant was an officer, and admittedly used by him to make payments in connection with another job being done by another corporation. Though the cause pleaded a violation of the Lien Law, that plea was surplusage because defendant admitted operative facts spelling out the additionally pleaded common-law tort of conversion. There was no showing of any novation, as claimed by defendant, permitting such use of the funds. Concur—Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Tilzer, Capozzoli and Nunez, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County, entered January 8, 1975, after trial to the court without a jury, unanimously affirmed, with $60 costs and disbursements to respondent. Though the suit was brought against others as well, under several causes for failure properly to renovate a building, only one cause was sustained, and properly so, against the individual defendant-appellant. That cause was for conversion of moneys paid over to a corporation of which defendant-appellant was an officer, and admittedly used by him to make payments in connection with another job being done by another corporation. Though the cause pleaded a violation of the Lien Law, that plea was surplusage because defendant admitted operative facts spelling out the additionally pleaded common-law tort of conversion. There was no showing of any novation, as claimed by defendant, permitting such use of the funds. Concur—Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Tilzer, Capozzoli and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.2d 723, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10659, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/darrow-associates-corp-v-schneider-nyappdiv-1975.