Stefanini v. Levy

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stefanini v. Levy

63 N.Y.S. 267

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

DecidedMarch 16, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 63 N.Y.S. 267 (Stefanini v. Levy) 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

Stefanini v. Levy, 63 N.Y.S. 267 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We think that upon the facts presented the injunction should have been continued had it appeared that Sroka was in fact the defendant’s agent, as plaintiff stated that he was in his affidavit. But as the agency was entirely disproved, and it was shown that Sroka was in possession of the premises under a contract of sale, and did the acts complained of upon his own responsibility and under his own right, there is no cause of action shown, as against the defendant, Levy.

The order appealed from should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

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

PER CURIAM.

We think that upon the facts presented the injunction should have been continued had it appeared that Sroka was in fact the defendant’s agent, as plaintiff stated that he was in his affidavit. But as the agency was entirely disproved, and it was shown that Sroka was in possession of the premises under a contract of sale, and did the acts complained of upon his own responsibility and under his own right, there is no cause of action shown, as against the defendant, Levy.

The order appealed from should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 N.Y.S. 267, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stefanini-v-levy-nyappdiv-1900.