Tribelhorn, Inc. v. Hanavan

New York Supreme Court

Tribelhorn, Inc. v. Hanavan

63 Misc. 296

DecidedMay 15, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 63 Misc. 296 (Tribelhorn, Inc. v. Hanavan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tribelhorn, Inc. v. Hanavan, 63 Misc. 296 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1909).

Pincite

Opinions

Dayton, J.

As an inducement plaintiff promised to make certain repairs at or before the signing of the lease, as is fully shown by the testimony admitted. Some pertinent questions on this head were excluded. The court directed a verdict for the plaintiff. The case of Clenighan v. McFarland, 11 N. Y. Supp. 719, seems to. be “ on all fours ” with that at bar, as to the right to the defense here interposed. The jury should have been allowed to pass upon any disputed questions of fact.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

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

Dayton, J.

As an inducement plaintiff promised to make certain repairs at or before the signing of the lease, as is fully shown by the testimony admitted. Some pertinent questions on this head were excluded. The court directed a verdict for the plaintiff. The case of Clenighan v. McFarland, 11 N. Y. Supp. 719, seems to. be “ on all fours ” with that at bar, as to the right to the defense here interposed. The jury should have been allowed to pass upon any disputed questions of fact.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 Misc. 296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tribelhorn-inc-v-hanavan-nysupct-1909.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack