Hansa Overseas Corp. v. Krawehl

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hansa Overseas Corp. v. Krawehl

37 A.D.2d 928, 326 N.Y.S.2d 189, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3057

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

DecidedNovember 4, 1971

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 37 A.D.2d 928 (Hansa Overseas Corp. v. Krawehl) 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

Hansa Overseas Corp. v. Krawehl, 37 A.D.2d 928, 326 N.Y.S.2d 189, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3057 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Appellant.— In this special proceeding, pursuant to CPLR 5239, judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County, entered on June 15, 1971, adjudicating title, as a matter of law, •unanimously reversed, on the law, and vacated, and a hearing directed on .the allegations set forth in the petition and cross-petition. Respondent-appellant shall recover of petitioner-respondent $50 costs and disbursements of this appeal. The appellant sold automotive paint to Hanseatic Supply Corporation. The sales agreement allegedly provided the title would remain in the appellant pending full payment. Payment was not made and the appellant sued Hanseatic as well as its president Peter Ahrens and its secretary Franz Zinssmeister and also a second corporation, White Wing Motors, Inc., with which these individuals were connected. Ahrens, Zinssmeister and White Wing Motors, Inc., bad guaranteed Hanseatic’s obligations to the appellant, and endorsed the notes in payment of the paint. Appellant recovered judgment against Hanseatic and White Wing by default and on October 1, 1970 in proceedings supplementary to that judgment a restraining notice was served on third parties in possession of the paint and of the accounts receivable arising therefrom. This proceeding was .commenced to vacate the restraint, the petitioner claiming title to the paint and the accounts receivable. The record presents at least the following questions of fact: whether or not there was a conditional sales contract; whether the acquisition of the paint and the purported transfer by Zinssmeister to the petitioner were fraudulent; whether the petitioner-respondent Hansa Overseas Corporation has valid title. It might well he said the record discloses considerable evidence indicating title in respondent-appellant Krawehl. However, there are factual issues to be determined before the title may be determined as matter of law. Concur—Capozzoli, J. P., Markewieh, Nunez, Murphy and McNally, JJ.

_

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

Appellant.— In this special proceeding, pursuant to CPLR 5239, judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County, entered on June 15, 1971, adjudicating title, as a matter of law, •unanimously reversed, on the law, and vacated, and a hearing directed on .the allegations set forth in the petition and cross-petition. Respondent-appellant shall recover of petitioner-respondent $50 costs and disbursements of this appeal. The appellant sold automotive paint to Hanseatic Supply Corporation. The sales agreement allegedly provided the title would remain in the appellant pending full payment. Payment was not made and the appellant sued Hanseatic as well as its president Peter Ahrens and its secretary Franz Zinssmeister and also a second corporation, White Wing Motors, Inc., with which these individuals were connected. Ahrens, Zinssmeister and White Wing Motors, Inc., bad guaranteed Hanseatic’s obligations to the appellant, and endorsed the notes in payment of the paint. Appellant recovered judgment against Hanseatic and White Wing by default and on October 1, 1970 in proceedings supplementary to that judgment a restraining notice was served on third parties in possession of the paint and of the accounts receivable arising therefrom. This proceeding was .commenced to vacate the restraint, the petitioner claiming title to the paint and the accounts receivable. The record presents at least the following questions of fact: whether or not there was a conditional sales contract; whether the acquisition of the paint and the purported transfer by Zinssmeister to the petitioner were fraudulent; whether the petitioner-respondent Hansa Overseas Corporation has valid title. It might well he said the record discloses considerable evidence indicating title in respondent-appellant Krawehl. However, there are factual issues to be determined before the title may be determined as matter of law. Concur—Capozzoli, J. P., Markewieh, Nunez, Murphy and McNally, JJ.

_

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

37 A.D.2d 928, 326 N.Y.S.2d 189, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3057, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hansa-overseas-corp-v-krawehl-nyappdiv-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack