Hochstim v. Grossman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hochstim v. Grossman

256 A.D. 1025, 11 N.Y.S.2d 671, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5927

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided March 22, 1939·Published

Opinion

Defendants have appealed from an order of the Columbia Special Term of the Supreme Court granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. The action is brought to recover the sum of $2,500 alleged to be due because of the failure of the defendants to pay that amount pursuant to the terms of a contract between the parties. The answer alleges certain defenses which disclose that questions of fact are involved which should be tried. Order reversed, on the law and facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion for summary judgment denied, with ten dollars costs. Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur.

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

Defendants have appealed from an order of the Columbia Special Term of the Supreme Court granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. The action is brought to recover the sum of $2,500 alleged to be due because of the failure of the defendants to pay that amount pursuant to the terms of a contract between the parties. The answer alleges certain defenses which disclose that questions of fact are involved which should be tried. Order reversed, on the law and facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion for summary judgment denied, with ten dollars costs. Hill, P. J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur.

Hochstim v. Grossman, 256 A.D. 1025, 11 N.Y.S.2d 671, 1939 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5927 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

256 A.D. 1025 (Hochstim v. Grossman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.