Penguin Realty Co. v. Perez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Penguin Realty Co. v. Perez

43 A.D.2d 742, 350 N.Y.S.2d 714, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2802

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 43 A.D.2d 742 (Penguin Realty Co. v. Perez) 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

Penguin Realty Co. v. Perez, 43 A.D.2d 742, 350 N.Y.S.2d 714, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2802 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for conspiracy to deprive plaintiff of an opportunity to earn a brokerage commission, (1) plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 21, 1972, which granted a motion to set aside a jury verdict of $27,600 in plaintiff’s favor against certain of the defendants and (2) said defendants cross-appeal from so much of the order as granted a new trial. Order reversed, motion to set aside verdict denied and verdict reinstated, with costs to plaintiff. In our opinion, from the evidence adduced at the trial the jury could have reasonably inferred and concluded that the defendants against whom the verdict was returned conspired to deprive plaintiff of the opportunity to earn a brokerage commission. Shapiro, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Munder, Acting P. J., and Martuscello, J., dissent and vote to affirm.

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

In an action to recover damages for conspiracy to deprive plaintiff of an opportunity to earn a brokerage commission, (1) plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered December 21, 1972, which granted a motion to set aside a jury verdict of $27,600 in plaintiff’s favor against certain of the defendants and (2) said defendants cross-appeal from so much of the order as granted a new trial. Order reversed, motion to set aside verdict denied and verdict reinstated, with costs to plaintiff. In our opinion, from the evidence adduced at the trial the jury could have reasonably inferred and concluded that the defendants against whom the verdict was returned conspired to deprive plaintiff of the opportunity to earn a brokerage commission. Shapiro, Brennan and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Munder, Acting P. J., and Martuscello, J., dissent and vote to affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.2d 742, 350 N.Y.S.2d 714, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/penguin-realty-co-v-perez-nyappdiv-1973.