Goldwater v. Fisch
This text of 261 A.D. 226 (Goldwater v. Fisch) 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.
Opinions
When the proceeds of the settlement were paid over to defendant, as attorney for Charles Pugh, the equitable title of the city of New York for the amount of its claim ripened into a legal title and defendant, having full knowledge of the city’s interest, was obligated to pay to the plaintiff the sum to which the city was entitled.
The amount of the judgment also appears to be sustained by the proof. The arguments advanced by defendant to the effect that Pugh was not liable to the city for surgical fees are similar to those considered in Matter of Kocko v. Harris Coal Co., Inc. (262 N. Y. 535). In that case the Court of Appeals held that such charges were proper.
The determination of the Appellate Term should be affirmed, with costs.
Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley and Cohn, JJ., concur; Callahan, J., dissents, with memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
261 A.D. 226, 25 N.Y.S.2d 84, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldwater-v-fisch-nyappdiv-1941.