Greenberg v. Gilman

Fifth Circuit

Greenberg v. Gilman

173 F.2d 703, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2889

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedApril 4, 1949

DocketNo. 12545

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 173 F.2d 703 (Greenberg v. Gilman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Greenberg v. Gilman, 173 F.2d 703, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2889 (5th Cir. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We are unable to say that there was no substantial evidence to support the findings of the lower Court that the plaintiff rented an apartment instead of hotel accommodations, and that, therefore, there was an overcharge as found, but we think that the evidence fails to show that the overcharge was willful or due to the failure to take reasonable precautions and, therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to recover only the amount of the overcharge, plus a reasonable attorney’s fee. The case, however, will be affirmed on the condition that the plaintiff within thirty days enters a remittitur of two-thirds of the recovery allowed, and two-thirds of the attorney’s fee. Otherwise the case will stand reversed for a new trial.

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

PER CURIAM.

We are unable to say that there was no substantial evidence to support the findings of the lower Court that the plaintiff rented an apartment instead of hotel accommodations, and that, therefore, there was an overcharge as found, but we think that the evidence fails to show that the overcharge was willful or due to the failure to take reasonable precautions and, therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to recover only the amount of the overcharge, plus a reasonable attorney’s fee. The case, however, will be affirmed on the condition that the plaintiff within thirty days enters a remittitur of two-thirds of the recovery allowed, and two-thirds of the attorney’s fee. Otherwise the case will stand reversed for a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 F.2d 703, 1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 2889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenberg-v-gilman-ca5-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack