Du Broff v. Gerber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Du Broff v. Gerber

32 A.D.2d 833, 302 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3536

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

DecidedJune 30, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 32 A.D.2d 833 (Du Broff v. Gerber) 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

Du Broff v. Gerber, 32 A.D.2d 833, 302 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3536 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for alleged fraud, plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered May 2, 1967, as dismissed the first, third, fourth and fifth causes of action, upon the trial court’s decision during a jury trial. Order modified, on the law, by striking therefrom the second decretal paragraph, which dismissed the third cause of action, and by substituting therefor a provision denying the motion to dismiss that cause of action. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to appellant to abide the event of the new trial. No questions of fact were considered. In our opinion, sufficient was proved by plaintiff to warrant the submission of the third cause of action to the jury. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Munder and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for alleged fraud, plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered May 2, 1967, as dismissed the first, third, fourth and fifth causes of action, upon the trial court’s decision during a jury trial. Order modified, on the law, by striking therefrom the second decretal paragraph, which dismissed the third cause of action, and by substituting therefor a provision denying the motion to dismiss that cause of action. As so modified, order affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to appellant to abide the event of the new trial. No questions of fact were considered. In our opinion, sufficient was proved by plaintiff to warrant the submission of the third cause of action to the jury. Christ, Acting P. J., Brennan, Hopkins, Munder and Kleinfeld, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.2d 833, 302 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3536, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/du-broff-v-gerber-nyappdiv-1969.