Fitzgerald Brother Brewing Co. v. Finnerty

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Fitzgerald Brother Brewing Co. v. Finnerty

30 Misc. 784, 62 N.Y.S. 1137

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 15, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 30 Misc. 784 (Fitzgerald Brother Brewing Co. v. Finnerty) 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

Fitzgerald Brother Brewing Co. v. Finnerty, 30 Misc. 784, 62 N.Y.S. 1137 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This was an action to recover a deficiency arising under the foreclosure of a chattel mortgage. The proof clearly established the execution and delivery of the mortgage, default, sale under the mortgage and resulting deficiency. At the close of the entire case, defendant moved for judgment on the ground [785]*785there was no proof of a sale under the mortgage. There was nothing in the case, however, to justify this contention. That a sale took place is clearly established by uncontradicted evidence.

The judgment rendered in favor of the defendant is without proof to support it, and must be reversed.

Present: Beekman, P. J.; Giegerich and O’Gorman, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

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

Per Curiam.

This was an action to recover a deficiency arising under the foreclosure of a chattel mortgage. The proof clearly established the execution and delivery of the mortgage, default, sale under the mortgage and resulting deficiency. At the close of the entire case, defendant moved for judgment on the ground [785]*785there was no proof of a sale under the mortgage. There was nothing in the case, however, to justify this contention. That a sale took place is clearly established by uncontradicted evidence.

The judgment rendered in favor of the defendant is without proof to support it, and must be reversed.

Present: Beekman, P. J.; Giegerich and O’Gorman, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

30 Misc. 784, 62 N.Y.S. 1137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fitzgerald-brother-brewing-co-v-finnerty-nyappterm-1900.