Kargman v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp.

263 A.D. 720, 30 N.Y.S.2d 650, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4706
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 3, 1941
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 263 A.D. 720 (Kargman v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp.) 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
Kargman v. Brooklyn & Queens Transit Corp., 263 A.D. 720, 30 N.Y.S.2d 650, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4706 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1941).

Opinion

In an action by Samuel Kargman and Valentine L. Shannon to recover damages for personal injuries and by Dora Kargman for property damage, plaintiffs appeal from an order denying their motion for an order (a) vacating and setting aside a settlement of their respective claims, and (b) restoring the case to the calendar for trial. Order reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, without costs, to the extent of directing that the action be restored to the trial calendar without loss of position. Here there was at most an accord but no satisfaction, and hence no agreement of settlement. (Reilly v. Barrett, 220 N. Y. 170, 172, 173; Larscy v. Hogan & Sons, 239 id. 298, 301, 302.) Therefore, there is no occasion to vacate such an agreement. Further, the former attorney for plaintiffs was not authorized by his clients to settle the causes of action. Without such authority the attorney had no power to enter into the stipulation to settle the causes, which stipulation was a nullity. (Bruder v. Schwartz, 260 App. Div. 1048; Sherman & Sons Co. v. Princess Shirt Waist Mfg. Co., 213 id. 140; Countryman v. Breen, 241 id. 392.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Adel, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Cord v. Cutola
121 Misc. 2d 300 (New York Supreme Court, 1983)
Gonzalez v. Diaz
91 Misc. 2d 629 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1977)
Peguero v. Grant
90 Misc. 2d 580 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1977)
Kahn v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority
63 Misc. 2d 1001 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1970)
Monasebian v. Du Bois
30 A.D.2d 839 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1968)
Palm Beach Royal Hotel, Inc. v. Breese
154 So. 2d 698 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1963)
Moylan v. Naylor
12 A.D.2d 854 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1961)
Accarino v. Hirsch
6 A.D.2d 795 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1958)
Rosen v. Grand
6 A.D.2d 799 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1958)
Langlois v. Langlois
5 A.D.2d 75 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1957)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
263 A.D. 720, 30 N.Y.S.2d 650, 1941 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4706, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kargman-v-brooklyn-queens-transit-corp-nyappdiv-1941.