Lobel v. Papczun

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Lobel v. Papczun

47 Misc. 2d 1043, 263 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1965 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1601

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedAugust 6, 1965

StatusPublished

This text of 47 Misc. 2d 1043 (Lobel v. Papczun) 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

Lobel v. Papczun, 47 Misc. 2d 1043, 263 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1965 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1601 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It was error to take from the jury resolution of the question raised by the affirmative defense to the effect that defendant building inspector’s conduct did not amount to “ bad faith ” as required by section 642-5.0 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. It was also error to require the plaintiffs to carry the burden of proof on the issue.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with $30 costs to plaintiffs to abide the event.

Concur — DiGiovanna, Gulotta and Brenner, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

It was error to take from the jury resolution of the question raised by the affirmative defense to the effect that defendant building inspector’s conduct did not amount to “ bad faith ” as required by section 642-5.0 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. It was also error to require the plaintiffs to carry the burden of proof on the issue.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with $30 costs to plaintiffs to abide the event.

Concur — DiGiovanna, Gulotta and Brenner, JJ.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 Misc. 2d 1043, 263 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1965 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1601, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lobel-v-papczun-nyappterm-1965.