Roth v. Zaidenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Roth v. Zaidenberg

267 A.D. 978, 48 N.Y.S.2d 241

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 19, 1944·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The evidence adduced, which was uncontradicted, warranted the decision of Special Term in defendant’s favor on the first counterclaim. Some of the findings are somewhat inconsistent, and the first and second conclusions of law requested by plaintiffs should not have been allowed. These may be corrected by settlement of the .order with new findings. The interlocutory judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Martin, P. J., Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ., concur; Untermyer, J., dissents and votes to reverse and grant a new trial.

Interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs. Settle order on notice.

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

Per Curiam.

The evidence adduced, which was uncontradicted, warranted the decision of Special Term in defendant’s favor on the first counterclaim. Some of the findings are somewhat inconsistent, and the first and second conclusions of law requested by plaintiffs should not have been allowed. These may be corrected by settlement of the .order with new findings. The interlocutory judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Martin, P. J., Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ., concur; Untermyer, J., dissents and votes to reverse and grant a new trial.

Interlocutory judgment affirmed, with costs. Settle order on notice.

Roth v. Zaidenberg, 267 A.D. 978, 48 N.Y.S.2d 241 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Pincite

267 A.D. 978 (Roth v. Zaidenberg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.