Meguin v. Kramer

49 Misc. 2d 572, 268 N.Y.S.2d 191, 1965 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1232
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided December 22, 1965·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Plaintiffs, who were not licensed to do plumbing work in New York City, may not recover a balance alleged to be due even if such work were subcontracted by plaintiffs to a licensed plumber (Wexler v. Rust, 144 App. Div. 296; Weinstein v. Silberfeld, 116 N. Y. S. 2d 471; see, also, Bronold v. Engler, 194 N. Y. 323). However, plaintiffs are not precluded from seeking to recover any unpaid balance claimed to be due for work other than plumbing and materials furnished in connection therewith (Johnston v. Dahlgren, 166 N. Y. 354; Weinstein v. Silberfeld, supra; 18 N. Y. Jur., Electricians, Plumbers, Artisans, § 25).

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

Concur — Brows", Schwaetewald and Baker, JJ.

Judgment and order reversed, etc.

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

Meguin v. Kramer, 49 Misc. 2d 572, 268 N.Y.S.2d 191, 1965 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1232 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

49 Misc. 2d 572 (Meguin v. Kramer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ellis v. Gold
204 A.D.2d 261 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Vegliack v. Mazzella
73 Misc. 2d 90 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1973)