From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kropf v. Joseph Elec. Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Jun 13, 1957
9 Misc. 2d 271 (N.Y. App. Term 1957)

Opinion

June 13, 1957

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York, County of New York, MAURICE WAHL, J.

Jack Levy and Samuel W. Gilman for appellant.

Freda Silbowitz for respondent.


Where a complaint is predicated on causes of action in contract and tort, not all of which authorize the granting of a body execution, such execution may not issue unless it is clear that plaintiff's recovery was based on a cause of action which authorizes a body execution ( Boyle v. Semenoff, 201 App. Div. 426). Upon the verdict here, plaintiff lost his right to a body execution and there is nothing that plaintiff could adduce before another court in addition to the papers before the court on the application here under review which would entitle him to a body execution. Accordingly the motion should have been denied on the merits and it was error to deny the application "without prejudice".

The order should be modified by deleting therefrom the words "without prejudice" and as modified affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

HECHT, AURELIO and TILZER, JJ., concur.

Order modified, etc.


Summaries of

Kropf v. Joseph Elec. Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Jun 13, 1957
9 Misc. 2d 271 (N.Y. App. Term 1957)
Case details for

Kropf v. Joseph Elec. Co.

Case Details

Full title:CARL KROPF, Individually and Doing Business as INTERNATIONAL FLUORESCENT…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Jun 13, 1957

Citations

9 Misc. 2d 271 (N.Y. App. Term 1957)
163 N.Y.S.2d 698