Mauser v. Friesco Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mauser v. Friesco Realty Corp.

230 A.D. 790

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

DecidedSeptember 15, 1930

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 230 A.D. 790 (Mauser v. Friesco Realty Corp.) 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

Mauser v. Friesco Realty Corp., 230 A.D. 790 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed upon the law and the facts, with costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff for the relief demanded in the complaint and dismissing defendant’s counterclaim upon the merits, with costs. The restrictive covenants of record affecting the premises described in the complaint are an incumbrance upon the title which justified the rejection of the title by the plaintiff. (Kimball Co. v. Fox, 120 Misc. 701; affd., 209 App. Div. 812; affd., 239 N. Y. 554; Isaacs v. Schmuck, 245 id. 77; Van Vliet & Place, Inc., v. Gaines, 249 id. 106; Calleran v. Gallen, 219 App. Div. 801; Ginsburg v. Andron, 222 id. 823.) Findings of fact and conclusions of law inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings and conclusions will be made. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Scudder, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.

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

Judgment reversed upon the law and the facts, with costs, and judgment directed for plaintiff for the relief demanded in the complaint and dismissing defendant’s counterclaim upon the merits, with costs. The restrictive covenants of record affecting the premises described in the complaint are an incumbrance upon the title which justified the rejection of the title by the plaintiff. (Kimball Co. v. Fox, 120 Misc. 701; affd., 209 App. Div. 812; affd., 239 N. Y. 554; Isaacs v. Schmuck, 245 id. 77; Van Vliet & Place, Inc., v. Gaines, 249 id. 106; Calleran v. Gallen, 219 App. Div. 801; Ginsburg v. Andron, 222 id. 823.) Findings of fact and conclusions of law inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings and conclusions will be made. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Scudder, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 A.D. 790, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mauser-v-friesco-realty-corp-nyappdiv-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack