Pakas v. Hurley
This text of 149 A.D. 909 (Pakas v. Hurley) 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.
Opinions
We have carefully re-examined this case, and remain of the opinion that the judgment must be reversed and a newtrial granted, and this for the reasons stated by Mr. Justice Miller on the former hearing. The slight discrepancy between the facts as stated in that opinion and as they appeared by the evidence is unimportant, if, as we consider the true measure of damage is the amounts of rents eoEeeted for stores and apartments, less the sums actually and necessarily expended in so running the buüding as to retain the tenants and so make any coEection of rents possible. Judgment reversed and new trial granted, with costs to appeEantto abide the event. Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin and Clarke, JJ., concurred. Laughlin, J., dissented.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
149 A.D. 909, 133 N.Y.S. 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pakas-v-hurley-nyappdiv-1912.