Roman v. Lobe

New York Court of Appeals

Roman v. Lobe

150 N.E. 535, 241 N.Y. 514, 1925 N.Y. LEXIS 586

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Roman v. Lobe. Read the opinion of the Court — 243 N.Y. 51 →

New York Court of Appeals·Decided October 20, 1925·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The question of the constitutionality of section 442-e of the Real Property Law is not before us on this appeal.

The decision of the trial court does not show upon its face that the plaintiff was denied a recovery because of his omission to procure a license. It is a decision for the defendant upon the merits generally. The Constitution commands us to presume that this decision, having been unanimously affirmed by thé Appellate Division, is supported by the evidence (Constitution, art. VI, § 9).

. The judgment should be affirmed with costs.

His cock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Per Curiam.

The question of the constitutionality of section 442-e of the Real Property Law is not before us on this appeal.

The decision of the trial court does not show upon its face that the plaintiff was denied a recovery because of his omission to procure a license. It is a decision for the defendant upon the merits generally. The Constitution commands us to presume that this decision, having been unanimously affirmed by thé Appellate Division, is supported by the evidence (Constitution, art. VI, § 9).

. The judgment should be affirmed with costs.

His cock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.

Roman v. Lobe, 150 N.E. 535, 241 N.Y. 514, 1925 N.Y. LEXIS 586 (N.Y. 1925).

Pincite

150 N.E. 535 (Roman v. Lobe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.