Turk v. Hirsch

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Turk v. Hirsch

128 Misc. 444

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided September 15, 1926·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

There were controverted questions of fact in the record, and the motion of tenant’s counsel, promptly made, to go to the jury on the issues, should have been granted. The fact that the tenant’s counsel -had previously moved to dismiss the petition for failure of proof, and that the landlord’s counsel had [445]*445moved for a direction of the verdict, which latter motion the court had granted, did not deprive the tenant of bis right to have the questions of fact tried by the jury. (Ruppert v. Singhi, 212 App. Div. 630; International Battery Co. v. Westreich, 182 id. 843.)

Final order unanimously reversed upon the law, and new trial granted, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

Present — Cropsey, MacCrate and Lewis, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

There were controverted questions of fact in the record, and the motion of tenant’s counsel, promptly made, to go to the jury on the issues, should have been granted. The fact that the tenant’s counsel -had previously moved to dismiss the petition for failure of proof, and that the landlord’s counsel had [445]*445moved for a direction of the verdict, which latter motion the court had granted, did not deprive the tenant of bis right to have the questions of fact tried by the jury. (Ruppert v. Singhi, 212 App. Div. 630; International Battery Co. v. Westreich, 182 id. 843.)

Final order unanimously reversed upon the law, and new trial granted, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

Present — Cropsey, MacCrate and Lewis, JJ.

Turk v. Hirsch, 128 Misc. 444 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1926).

Pincite

128 Misc. 444 (Turk v. Hirsch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related