Friedman v. Katz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Friedman v. Katz

271 A.D.2d 836

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

DecidedNovember 18, 1946

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 836 (Friedman v. Katz) 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

Friedman v. Katz, 271 A.D.2d 836 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Action in equity to obtain a determination of a claim to real property. Judgment for plaintiffs, adjudging that they have title to the premises described in the complaint, that defendants have no claim or right to any interest in the premises, and awarding damages to plaintiffs for the wrongful withholding of the property by defendants, unanimously affirmed, with costs. In the absence of a confidential relationship between the decedent and defendants,' or either of them, which was not established by the proof at this trial, there can be no adjudication of an existent trust (Fraw Realty Co. v. Natfmson, 261 N. Y. 396; Sinclair v. Purdy, 235 N. Y. 245), and the alleged oral agreement is without efficacy. (Real Property Law, § 242.) Present — Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Aldrich and Nolan, JJ.

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

Action in equity to obtain a determination of a claim to real property. Judgment for plaintiffs, adjudging that they have title to the premises described in the complaint, that defendants have no claim or right to any interest in the premises, and awarding damages to plaintiffs for the wrongful withholding of the property by defendants, unanimously affirmed, with costs. In the absence of a confidential relationship between the decedent and defendants,' or either of them, which was not established by the proof at this trial, there can be no adjudication of an existent trust (Fraw Realty Co. v. Natfmson, 261 N. Y. 396; Sinclair v. Purdy, 235 N. Y. 245), and the alleged oral agreement is without efficacy. (Real Property Law, § 242.) Present — Hagarty, Acting P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Aldrich and Nolan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 836, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friedman-v-katz-nyappdiv-1946.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack