Bogden v. Wingate Realty Co.

Full title: HELENA BOGDEN, Respondent, v. WINGATE REALTY COMPANY et al., Appellants

Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Feb 6, 1964

43 Misc. 2d 1083 (N.Y. App. Term 1964)

252 N.Y.S.2d 994

Opinion

February 6, 1964

Appeal from the Civil Court of the City of New York, County of New York, PELHAM S. BISSELL, 3D, J.

Irving Segal and Sidney Advocate for Wingate Realty Company, appellant.

Raymond J. MacDonnell and Herbert M. Katz for D T Concrete Co., Inc., appellant.

Schneider Lichtenstein ( Charles Lichtenstein of counsel), for respondent.

Per Curiam.

The provision of section 192 of the Civil Court Act [now § 2203] that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, as to causes transferred from abolished courts, shall be "contracted to that of the abolished court so as to prevent this court from giving relief * * * in such amount as could not be given by the abolished court" is clear and unambiguous. The granting of plaintiff's motion to increase the damages beyond the amount which the City Court could have given was a violation of section 192.

That portion of the order granting plaintiff's motion to increase the amount demanded in the complaint should be reversed, with $10 costs, otherwise, affirmed.

Concur — GOLD, J.P., HECHT and TILZER, JJ.

Order granting motion to increase the amount demanded in the complaint reversed, otherwise affirmed.