From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Karlinsky v. Silberman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1940
259 App. Div. 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Opinion

June 3, 1940.


This action was brought to recover for services alleged to have been performed by plaintiff between February 1, 1930, and January 15, 1937. He alleges that he duly managed, controlled, rented, leased and collected the rents of certain real estate in the borough of Brooklyn, for which services he seeks compensation. Plaintiff has recovered judgment, entered upon the verdict of a jury. From such judgment defendant appeals. Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, without costs, and complaint dismissed upon the law, with costs. Concededly, plaintiff is not a licensed real estate broker. Some of the services claimed to have been rendered by him are clearly within the purview of the provisions of article 12-A of the Real Property Law; and no recovery may be had for any of the services rendered. ( American Store Equipment Constr. Corp. v. Jack Dempsey's Punch Bowl, Inc., N.Y.L.J. May 4, 1939, p. 2055; affd., without opinion, 258 App. Div. 794; affd. by the Court of Appeals, 283 N.Y. 601.) Conceding, arguendo, that article 12-A does not apply, the verdict is against the weight of evidence. Lazansky, P.J., Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Close, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Karlinsky v. Silberman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1940
259 App. Div. 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)
Case details for

Karlinsky v. Silberman

Case Details

Full title:HARRY KARLINSKY, Respondent, v. MORRIS SILBERMAN, Individually and as…

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

Date published: Jun 3, 1940

Citations

259 App. Div. 1016 (N.Y. App. Div. 1940)

Citing Cases

Birnbaum v. Birnbaum

As he stated, "I ran some advertisements in the Philadelphia Inquirer and some local real estate newspapers…