Dorfman v. Mt. Sinai Building & Loan Ass'n

166 A. 629, 11 N.J. Misc. 429, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 222
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedJune 10, 1933
StatusPublished

This text of 166 A. 629 (Dorfman v. Mt. Sinai Building & Loan Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Dorfman v. Mt. Sinai Building & Loan Ass'n, 166 A. 629, 11 N.J. Misc. 429, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 222 (N.J. 1933).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This ease presents an appeal by the defendant-appellant from a judgment recovered by the plaintiff below in the sum of $140.

The plaintiff, a shareholder in the defendant building and loan association, sued to recover this amount of $140 which she alleges was paid by her over and above the amount due to the building and loan association on a mortgage loan. It is not disputed that this amount was paid by the plaintiff but the defendant says this sum was applied by it to unpaid insurance premiums covering the plaintiff’s property. On the other hand, the husband of the plaintiff swears that he paid the insurance premiums, amounting to $140, to the president of the building and loan association which, of course, presents a fact issue.

The state of the case, agreed upon by counsel for the respective parties, comes before us in a very unsatisfactory condition. The parties, for instance, are unable to agree as to whether or not a certain question was asked (which may have [430]*430been important in this controversy) and the notes of the trial judge do not disclose whether or not the question was asked. It does appear, however, that the defendant moved for a non-suit, which was denied, and that the court let the case go to the jury as to whether or not the president of the defendant building and loan association acted as the plaintiff’s agent o-r the defendant’s agent in applying plaintiff’s moneys- to the payment of insurance premium. The court’s ruling on these questions was in no- way excepted to and these questions therefore are not available to the appellant for the purposes of an appeal. Klein v. Shryer, 106 N. J. L. 433; 150 Atl. Rep. 321.

The appeal is therefore dismissed, with costs.

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

Related

Klein v. Shryer
150 A. 321 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1930)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
166 A. 629, 11 N.J. Misc. 429, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dorfman-v-mt-sinai-building-loan-assn-nj-1933.