Levy v. Ash

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Levy v. Ash

88 N.Y.S. 131

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 5, 1904

StatusPublished

This text of 88 N.Y.S. 131 (Levy v. Ash) 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

Levy v. Ash, 88 N.Y.S. 131 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1904).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The action was brought for goods sold and delivered by plaintiff’s assignor, and the defendant counterclaimed damages arising from a breach of contract between himself and plaintiff’s assignor. A judgment was rendered upon the counterclaim for the difference between the amount therein claimed and the plaintiff’s claim. The claim asserted by defendant would be at most an offset, and no affirmative judgment for the excess could be rendered against the plaintiff. Defendant’s proofs also show that, assuming that he was entitled to an offset, in no aspect would he be entitled to more than the sum of $18.50, which was less than the plaintiff’s claim. It is unnecessary to refer to other alleged errors affecting the admission of evidence, as sufficient has been shown to entitle the appellant to a reversal of the judgment.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

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

PER CURIAM.

The action was brought for goods sold and delivered by plaintiff’s assignor, and the defendant counterclaimed damages arising from a breach of contract between himself and plaintiff’s assignor. A judgment was rendered upon the counterclaim for the difference between the amount therein claimed and the plaintiff’s claim. The claim asserted by defendant would be at most an offset, and no affirmative judgment for the excess could be rendered against the plaintiff. Defendant’s proofs also show that, assuming that he was entitled to an offset, in no aspect would he be entitled to more than the sum of $18.50, which was less than the plaintiff’s claim. It is unnecessary to refer to other alleged errors affecting the admission of evidence, as sufficient has been shown to entitle the appellant to a reversal of the judgment.

Judgment reversed, and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 N.Y.S. 131, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levy-v-ash-nyappterm-1904.