Jacobs v. RJAK Enterprises Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jacobs v. RJAK Enterprises Inc.

226 A.D.2d 679, 642 N.Y.S.2d 531, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4572

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

DecidedApril 29, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 226 A.D.2d 679 (Jacobs v. RJAK Enterprises Inc.) 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

Jacobs v. RJAK Enterprises Inc., 226 A.D.2d 679, 642 N.Y.S.2d 531, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4572 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for money had and received, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Goldstein, J.), entered September 19, 1994, as, following a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant RJAK Enterprises, Inc., in the principal sum of $55,100, and against the defendant Alexander Kaganowicz in the principal sum of $37,500. The appeal brings up for review so much of an order of the same court, entered November 30, 1994, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination (see, CPLR 5517 [b]).

Ordered that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed, as the judgment was superseded by the order made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

Ordered that the plaintiff is awarded one bill of costs.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the [680]*680plaintiff (see, Mirand v City of New York, 84 NY2d 44, 50), we find that the verdict was supported by sufficient evidence (see, Cohen v Hallmark Cards, 45 NY2d 493, 499). Moreover, the verdict was based upon a fair interpretation of the evidence (see, Nicastro v Park, 113 AD2d 129, 134).

We have reviewed the defendants’ remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Sullivan, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for money had and received, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Goldstein, J.), entered September 19, 1994, as, following a nonjury trial, is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant RJAK Enterprises, Inc., in the principal sum of $55,100, and against the defendant Alexander Kaganowicz in the principal sum of $37,500. The appeal brings up for review so much of an order of the same court, entered November 30, 1994, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination (see, CPLR 5517 [b]).