From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ackerman v. Goldstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 1931
232 App. Div. 839 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)

Opinion

March, 1931.


Order in so far as it denies motion to amend complaint affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The proposed amendment is not within the purview of section 105 of the Civil Practice Act. While the amendment may, upon a proper showing, be permitted, the issue tendered thereby must be the subject of a trial, and without a finding of fact that defendants' representations were knowingly false, the plaintiff would not be entitled to judgment. Lazansky, P.J., Kapper, Carswell, Scudder and Davis, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ackerman v. Goldstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 1, 1931
232 App. Div. 839 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)
Case details for

Ackerman v. Goldstein

Case Details

Full title:DAVID ACKERMAN, Appellant, v. FRANK GOLDSTEIN and MAX SWERDLOFF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 1, 1931

Citations

232 App. Div. 839 (N.Y. App. Div. 1931)