Maloy v. Associated Lace Makers' Ass'n
This text of 5 Silv. Sup. 481 (Maloy v. Associated Lace Makers' Ass'n) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Although the title to the real estate may, in a certain sense, have been involved in the action, the real [482]*482controversy concerned only the plaintiff’s interest therein. Nothing appears in the case that enables the court to know the value of such interest. Probably no' one can tell the amount until the close of the partnership accounting.
On that state of facts the trial judge could not determine what amount was in controversy, and consequently had no basis upon which to fix an allowance.
The litigation was difficult, and it is to be regretted that its weight must be principally borne by the successful party.
We see no way to any different result on the papers before us.
The order must be affirmed, but without costs.
Barnard P. J., concurs; Dykman, J., not sitting.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
5 Silv. Sup. 481, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maloy-v-associated-lace-makers-assn-nysupct-1890.