Van Alen v. Trubenback

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Van Alen v. Trubenback

159 N.Y.S. 153

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMay 26, 1916

StatusPublished

This text of 159 N.Y.S. 153 (Van Alen v. Trubenback) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Van Alen v. Trubenback, 159 N.Y.S. 153 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

Appellant urges a number of errors, but only one need be considered, ,as that requires a reversal of the judgment rendered.

[154]*154Defendant has been allowed to recover damages by way of counterclaim for alleged false representation in regard to the previous receipts and profits of a business which he purchased. The only alleged proof of the falsity of this representation was as to the amount of receipts and profits of the business after defendant took possession and conducted the same. Without commenting on the fact that the proof as to these subsequent receipts was far from complete or sufficient, it is perfectly evident that it did not show the falsity of representations as to the receipts prior to' that time, while the business was being conducted by the plaintiff.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

BIJUR, J.

Appellant urges a number of errors, but only one need be considered, ,as that requires a reversal of the judgment rendered.

[154]*154Defendant has been allowed to recover damages by way of counterclaim for alleged false representation in regard to the previous receipts and profits of a business which he purchased. The only alleged proof of the falsity of this representation was as to the amount of receipts and profits of the business after defendant took possession and conducted the same. Without commenting on the fact that the proof as to these subsequent receipts was far from complete or sufficient, it is perfectly evident that it did not show the falsity of representations as to the receipts prior to' that time, while the business was being conducted by the plaintiff.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 N.Y.S. 153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-alen-v-trubenback-nyappterm-1916.