Davis v. Musil

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis v. Musil

250 A.D. 761, 295 N.Y.S. 124, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8879

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

DecidedMarch 1, 1937

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D. 761 (Davis v. Musil) 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

Davis v. Musil, 250 A.D. 761, 295 N.Y.S. 124, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8879 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to rescind a contract for the purchase and sale of real property and to recover the down payment and expenses, in which defendant counterclaimed for specific performance, judgment rescinding the contract and awarding plaintiff the sum of $1,165.75 and dismissing defendant’s counterclaim on the merits unanimously affirmed, with costs. Defendant’s proposed findings of fact numbered 13 and 14 are reversed because they are without evidence to support them and are inconsistent with the judgment, and defendant’s conclusions of law numbered 5 and 6 are reversed because they are not necessary to the decision. No opinion. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Johnston, JJ.

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

In an action to rescind a contract for the purchase and sale of real property and to recover the down payment and expenses, in which defendant counterclaimed for specific performance, judgment rescinding the contract and awarding plaintiff the sum of $1,165.75 and dismissing defendant’s counterclaim on the merits unanimously affirmed, with costs. Defendant’s proposed findings of fact numbered 13 and 14 are reversed because they are without evidence to support them and are inconsistent with the judgment, and defendant’s conclusions of law numbered 5 and 6 are reversed because they are not necessary to the decision. No opinion. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Hagarty, Carswell, Davis and Johnston, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D. 761, 295 N.Y.S. 124, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8879, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-musil-nyappdiv-1937.