History
  • No items yet
midpage
Corley v. Spitzer
235 A.D. 703
| N.Y. App. Div. | 1932
|
Check Treatment

Appeal dismissed, without costs, and the matter remitted to Special Term for the trial justice to make findings and direct the entry of judgment. The record contains no decision or proposed findings, although the memorandum decision required findings and judgment to be submitted. Apparently the judgment was entered on the mere unsigned memorandum of the court. Such a judgment has no validity. (Ventimiglia v. Eichner, 213 N. Y. 147; Langling Co. v. Elflein, 230 App. Div. 731.) The present judgment should be vacated and proposed findings submitted and passed upon, as the court directed. The amount of damages allowed seems to be excessive, for the value of the lot upon which the encroachment was made, as testified to by plaintiff’s expert, was only $800. Furthermore, as the defendants acted in good faith in pursuance of a survey they had made before erecting their garage, the judgment might well provide for permanent damages instead of an injunction. (Crocker v. Manhattan Life Ins. Co., 61 App. Div. 226; Amerman v. Deane, 132 N. Y. 355; Goldbacher v. Eggers, 38 Misc. 36; affd., 82 App. Div. 637; 179 N. Y. 551.) Lazansky, P. J., Young, Cars-well, Tompkins and Davis, JJ.,Pconeur.

Case Details

Case Name: Corley v. Spitzer
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Feb 15, 1932
Citation: 235 A.D. 703
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.