Dornheim v. Vom Lehn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dornheim v. Vom Lehn

237 A.D. 838

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

DecidedDecember 15, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 237 A.D. 838 (Dornheim v. Vom Lehn) 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

Dornheim v. Vom Lehn, 237 A.D. 838 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to defendant to serve an answer within ten days after entry of the order herein and payment of said costs. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty and Davis, JJ., concur; Carswell, J., dissents, with the following memorandum: I incline to the view that the principle of Ireland v. United States Mortgage & T. Co. (72 App. Div. 95; affd., 175 N. Y. 491) is determinative of this case in favor of the defendant, especially as the two documents (the absolute assignment and the agreement, Exhibit A) were executed simultaneously, the plaintiffs having knowledge of the agreement and its effect on the assignment. A further ground for dissent is the presence of a reversionary interest in the lease in the Atlantic Avenue Corporation.

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

Order denying defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, with leave to defendant to serve an answer within ten days after entry of the order herein and payment of said costs. No opinion. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty and Davis, JJ., concur; Carswell, J., dissents, with the following memorandum: I incline to the view that the principle of Ireland v. United States Mortgage & T. Co. (72 App. Div. 95; affd., 175 N. Y. 491) is determinative of this case in favor of the defendant, especially as the two documents (the absolute assignment and the agreement, Exhibit A) were executed simultaneously, the plaintiffs having knowledge of the agreement and its effect on the assignment. A further ground for dissent is the presence of a reversionary interest in the lease in the Atlantic Avenue Corporation.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

237 A.D. 838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dornheim-v-vom-lehn-nyappdiv-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack