Koff v. Benjamin Construction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Koff v. Benjamin Construction Co.

242 A.D. 703

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1934

StatusPublished

This text of 242 A.D. 703 (Koff v. Benjamin Construction Co.) 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

Koff v. Benjamin Construction Co., 242 A.D. 703 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying, on reargument, the motion to confirm the referee’s report and for leave to enter a deficiency judgment reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted to the extent of allowing plaintiff a deficiency judgment of $43,251.22 less $1,776.35, making the amount of the judgment $41,474.87. Section 1083-a of the Civil Practice Act has no application to this case, and no other valid ground is claimed for refusing plaintiff a deficiency judgment. In view of this determination, the appeals from the order denying plaintiff’s motion to amend the referee’s report and from the order entered April 12, 1934, granting motion for reargument and on reargument denying motion to amend the referee’s report and to direct the entry of a deficiency judgment, are dismissed. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying, on reargument, the motion to confirm the referee’s report and for leave to enter a deficiency judgment reversed on the law and the facts, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted to the extent of allowing plaintiff a deficiency judgment of $43,251.22 less $1,776.35, making the amount of the judgment $41,474.87. Section 1083-a of the Civil Practice Act has no application to this case, and no other valid ground is claimed for refusing plaintiff a deficiency judgment. In view of this determination, the appeals from the order denying plaintiff’s motion to amend the referee’s report and from the order entered April 12, 1934, granting motion for reargument and on reargument denying motion to amend the referee’s report and to direct the entry of a deficiency judgment, are dismissed. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Tompkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

242 A.D. 703, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/koff-v-benjamin-construction-co-nyappdiv-1934.