Galitzka v. J. Clarence Davies, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Galitzka v. J. Clarence Davies, Inc.

248 A.D. 721

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

DecidedJune 15, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D. 721 (Galitzka v. J. Clarence Davies, Inc.) 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

Galitzka v. J. Clarence Davies, Inc., 248 A.D. 721 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Plaintiff Galitzka, a real estate broker, and plaintiff Jasie, an attorney and assignee of a part of the broker’s claim, sued to recover commissions in the sum of $10,000, pursuant to an agreement of employment, for procuring a tenant for defendant of certain premises in the borough of Bronx. The first trial of the case resulted in a disagreement of the jury. By stipulation between the attorneys for the parties, a jury trial was then waived and the ease was submitted to the court at Trial Term and the testimony given at the first trial was read into the record. No witnesses were heard on the second trial. Judgment entered on a verdict directed by the court in favor of plaintiffs unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., MeAvoy, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

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

Plaintiff Galitzka, a real estate broker, and plaintiff Jasie, an attorney and assignee of a part of the broker’s claim, sued to recover commissions in the sum of $10,000, pursuant to an agreement of employment, for procuring a tenant for defendant of certain premises in the borough of Bronx. The first trial of the case resulted in a disagreement of the jury. By stipulation between the attorneys for the parties, a jury trial was then waived and the ease was submitted to the court at Trial Term and the testimony given at the first trial was read into the record. No witnesses were heard on the second trial. Judgment entered on a verdict directed by the court in favor of plaintiffs unanimously affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Martin, P. J., MeAvoy, Untermyer, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D. 721, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/galitzka-v-j-clarence-davies-inc-nyappdiv-1936.