Granite Lake Realty Corp. v. Cullum

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Granite Lake Realty Corp. v. Cullum

51 A.D.2d 761, 379 N.Y.S.2d 508, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11318

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 51 A.D.2d 761 (Granite Lake Realty Corp. v. Cullum) 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

Granite Lake Realty Corp. v. Cullum, 51 A.D.2d 761, 379 N.Y.S.2d 508, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11318 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered September 3, 1974, in favor of plaintiff in the amount of $21,000, plus interest and costs and disbursements, after a nonjury trial. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and new trial granted limited solely to the issue of damages, with costs to abide the event. The record establishes that defendant was in breach of contract, but it fails to adequately disclose the manner in which the amount of the damage award was fixed. A new trial limited solely to the issue of damages is therefore required. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani, Shapiro and Hawkins, 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 breach of contract, defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered September 3, 1974, in favor of plaintiff in the amount of $21,000, plus interest and costs and disbursements, after a nonjury trial. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, and new trial granted limited solely to the issue of damages, with costs to abide the event. The record establishes that defendant was in breach of contract, but it fails to adequately disclose the manner in which the amount of the damage award was fixed. A new trial limited solely to the issue of damages is therefore required. Cohalan, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani, Shapiro and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 761, 379 N.Y.S.2d 508, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11318, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/granite-lake-realty-corp-v-cullum-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack