Munch v. Goldenkranz

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Munch v. Goldenkranz

97 N.Y.S. 1142

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided March 12, 1906·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We think the judgment Was against the weight of evidence and that the facts were as testified to by the witness White and the defendant, namely, that the plaintiff, by a mutual agreement between him, White, and the defendant, was to pay for the furniture, and the defendant and White were to pay the rent and incidental expenses. The purchase of the pool tables was a subsequent matter with which the defendant had nothing to do. The expense of that purchase was to be shared between White and the plaintiff in proportions agreed upon between them. The other items embraced in the recovery need not now be discussed. The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

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

PER CURIAM.

We think the judgment Was against the weight of evidence and that the facts were as testified to by the witness White and the defendant, namely, that the plaintiff, by a mutual agreement between him, White, and the defendant, was to pay for the furniture, and the defendant and White were to pay the rent and incidental expenses. The purchase of the pool tables was a subsequent matter with which the defendant had nothing to do. The expense of that purchase was to be shared between White and the plaintiff in proportions agreed upon between them. The other items embraced in the recovery need not now be discussed. The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Munch v. Goldenkranz, 97 N.Y.S. 1142 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1906).

Pincite

97 N.Y.S. 1142 (Munch v. Goldenkranz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.