Racey v. Scotti

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Racey v. Scotti

123 Misc. 931, 206 N.Y.S. 629, 1924 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1234

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 18, 1924

StatusPublished

This text of 123 Misc. 931 (Racey v. Scotti) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Racey v. Scotti, 123 Misc. 931, 206 N.Y.S. 629, 1924 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1234 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The j udge’s charge to the j ury covered his opinion on certain economic factors involved in the construction and operation of real property, a comparison between the investment value thereof and other forms of investment and other subjects of similar nature, which could not but confuse the jury as to the issues to be determined by them, which was the fair and reasonable rental of the tenant’s premises. Due exception was taken by tenant’s counsel. Moreover, the verdict allowed rental far in excess of the maximum set in the judge’s charge, so that in any event the verdict cannot stand. The infirmity of a verdict rendered under these circumstances could not be cured by the landlord’-s voluntary relinquishment of part of the increase in certain of the rentals.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with twenty-five dollars costs to appellant.

All concur; present, Guy, Bijub and Mullan, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

The j udge’s charge to the j ury covered his opinion on certain economic factors involved in the construction and operation of real property, a comparison between the investment value thereof and other forms of investment and other subjects of similar nature, which could not but confuse the jury as to the issues to be determined by them, which was the fair and reasonable rental of the tenant’s premises. Due exception was taken by tenant’s counsel. Moreover, the verdict allowed rental far in excess of the maximum set in the judge’s charge, so that in any event the verdict cannot stand. The infirmity of a verdict rendered under these circumstances could not be cured by the landlord’-s voluntary relinquishment of part of the increase in certain of the rentals.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with twenty-five dollars costs to appellant.

All concur; present, Guy, Bijub and Mullan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 Misc. 931, 206 N.Y.S. 629, 1924 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1234, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/racey-v-scotti-nyappterm-1924.