Procario v. 74 & 76 West Tremont Avenue Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Procario v. 74 & 76 West Tremont Avenue Corp.

3 A.D.2d 821, 160 N.Y.S.2d 932, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5921

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

DecidedApril 9, 1957

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 3 A.D.2d 821 (Procario v. 74 & 76 West Tremont Avenue 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

Procario v. 74 & 76 West Tremont Avenue Corp., 3 A.D.2d 821, 160 N.Y.S.2d 932, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5921 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

The judgment appealed from is unanimously modified to the extent of striking paragraph 10 thereof, which directs payment of $12,019.74 to the estate of Louis B. Jameson, and as so modified, is otherwise affirmed. Conclusion of Law No. 14 is also stricken. Dr. Jameson negotiated and concluded the sale of his stock holdings to Dr. Goldstein and the latter’s nominees. Also, in connection with this sale, Dr. Jameson executed a general release to each of the respondent corporations. The issue of the additional payments to Dr. Jameson was never presented upon the trial, and no findings of fact were made in support of such a direction. Under the circumstances, there appears to be no warrant for presenting the estate of Dr. Jameson with something for which he never bargained. The trial court found “ a species of unfair dealing ” by Dr. Goldstein, and properly directed that he yield up the fruits of such dealings upon being repaid for the cost of the stock in question. Upon this record, there is no basis for requiring any additional payments to the estate of Dr. Jameson. Costs to respondents. Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Botein, Rabin, Yalente and McNally, JJ. [4 Misc 2d 533.] [See post, p. 894.]

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

The judgment appealed from is unanimously modified to the extent of striking paragraph 10 thereof, which directs payment of $12,019.74 to the estate of Louis B. Jameson, and as so modified, is otherwise affirmed. Conclusion of Law No. 14 is also stricken. Dr. Jameson negotiated and concluded the sale of his stock holdings to Dr. Goldstein and the latter’s nominees. Also, in connection with this sale, Dr. Jameson executed a general release to each of the respondent corporations. The issue of the additional payments to Dr. Jameson was never presented upon the trial, and no findings of fact were made in support of such a direction. Under the circumstances, there appears to be no warrant for presenting the estate of Dr. Jameson with something for which he never bargained. The trial court found “ a species of unfair dealing ” by Dr. Goldstein, and properly directed that he yield up the fruits of such dealings upon being repaid for the cost of the stock in question. Upon this record, there is no basis for requiring any additional payments to the estate of Dr. Jameson. Costs to respondents. Settle order on notice. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Botein, Rabin, Yalente and McNally, JJ. [4 Misc 2d 533.] [See post, p. 894.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 A.D.2d 821, 160 N.Y.S.2d 932, 1957 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5921, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/procario-v-74-76-west-tremont-avenue-corp-nyappdiv-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack