Harvard Financial Corp. v. Greenblatt Construction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Harvard Financial Corp. v. Greenblatt Construction Co.

236 A.D. 742

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 15, 1932·Published

Opinion

Judgment affirmed, with one bill of costs to respondents. No opinion. Young, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., and Carswell, J., dissent with the following memorandum: With the exception of the overhead shore beams, no damage to the realty [743]*743would attend the removal of the elevator apparatus. Those beams would not seem to be part of the elevator as such and may not be a basis for distinguishing this case from Greater New York Development Co. v. Ka-Ro Building Corp. (232 App. Div. 696; affd., 256 N. Y. 657). The dissent is on the theory that the removal would cause no “ material ” damage.

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

Judgment affirmed, with one bill of costs to respondents. No opinion. Young, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., and Carswell, J., dissent with the following memorandum: With the exception of the overhead shore beams, no damage to the realty [743]*743would attend the removal of the elevator apparatus. Those beams would not seem to be part of the elevator as such and may not be a basis for distinguishing this case from Greater New York Development Co. v. Ka-Ro Building Corp. (232 App. Div. 696; affd., 256 N. Y. 657). The dissent is on the theory that the removal would cause no “ material ” damage.

Harvard Financial Corp. v. Greenblatt Construction Co., 236 A.D. 742 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1932).

Pincite

236 A.D. 742 (Harvard Financial Corp. v. Greenblatt Construction Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related