Deitch v. Maher

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Deitch v. Maher

135 N.Y.S. 1072

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 21, 1912

StatusPublished

This text of 135 N.Y.S. 1072 (Deitch v. Maher) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Deitch v. Maher, 135 N.Y.S. 1072 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

The evidence in this action for conversion establishes almost conclusively that the plaintiff was merely the agent and representative of the judgment debtor, upon whose property an execution was levied by the defendant, a city marshal. The goods were those used in and about a bakery, which by a number of instruments of transfer had been placed in the name of the plaintiff under circumstances which indicate clearly that he, who admitted on the stand that he was a workman in the clothing business, acted merely as a dummy in the transaction. It is impossible to escape the conclusion that the jury was affected by some consideration other than the evidence submitted.

Judgment in favor of plaintiff must therefore be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

BIJUR, J.

The evidence in this action for conversion establishes almost conclusively that the plaintiff was merely the agent and representative of the judgment debtor, upon whose property an execution was levied by the defendant, a city marshal. The goods were those used in and about a bakery, which by a number of instruments of transfer had been placed in the name of the plaintiff under circumstances which indicate clearly that he, who admitted on the stand that he was a workman in the clothing business, acted merely as a dummy in the transaction. It is impossible to escape the conclusion that the jury was affected by some consideration other than the evidence submitted.

Judgment in favor of plaintiff must therefore be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

135 N.Y.S. 1072, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/deitch-v-maher-nyappterm-1912.