Keller v. Baltax

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Keller v. Baltax

186 Misc. 744, 61 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2090

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 21, 1946

StatusPublished

This text of 186 Misc. 744 (Keller v. Baltax) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Keller v. Baltax, 186 Misc. 744, 61 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2090 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum Per Curiam.

The plaintiff fully established that the defendant repeatedly made and was paid overcharges for the laundry service in violation of the Office of Price Administration regulation (8 Federal Register 16294, as amd.). The defendant’s contention that he could do so because the shirts were hand laundered is without merit. The regulation makes no distinction between hand laundered and machine laundered shirts. The defendant also overcharged for the laundering of the towels. There is no basis for the dismissal of the complaint.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff for the sum of $50, with costs.

Hammer, McLaughlin and Eder, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Memorandum Per Curiam.

The plaintiff fully established that the defendant repeatedly made and was paid overcharges for the laundry service in violation of the Office of Price Administration regulation (8 Federal Register 16294, as amd.). The defendant’s contention that he could do so because the shirts were hand laundered is without merit. The regulation makes no distinction between hand laundered and machine laundered shirts. The defendant also overcharged for the laundering of the towels. There is no basis for the dismissal of the complaint.

The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff for the sum of $50, with costs.

Hammer, McLaughlin and Eder, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 Misc. 744, 61 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2090, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keller-v-baltax-nyappterm-1946.