From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Meguin v. Kramer

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Dec 22, 1965
49 Misc. 2d 572 (N.Y. App. Term 1965)

Opinion

December 22, 1965

Appeal from the Civil Court of the City of New York, County of Queens, ERIC J. TREULICH, J.

Joseph S. Rodell and Michael L. Matar for appellant.

Tellerman Silverstein ( Walter C. Silverstein of counsel), for respondents.


Plaintiffs, who were not licensed to do plumbing work in New York City, may not recover a balance alleged to be due even if such work were subcontracted by plaintiffs to a licensed plumber ( Wexler v. Rust, 144 App. Div. 296; Weinstein v. Silberfeld, 116 N.Y.S.2d 471; see, also, Bronold v. Engler, 194 N.Y. 323). However, plaintiffs are not precluded from seeking to recover any unpaid balance claimed to be due for work other than plumbing and materials furnished in connection therewith ( Johnston v. Dahlgren, 166 N.Y. 354; Weinstein v. Silberfeld, supra; 18 N.Y. Jur., Electricians, Plumbers, Artisans, § 25).

The judgment and order should be unanimously reversed and a new trial ordered, with $30 costs to defendant to abide the event.

Concur — BROWN, SCHWARTZWALD and BAKER, JJ.

Judgment and order reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Meguin v. Kramer

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department
Dec 22, 1965
49 Misc. 2d 572 (N.Y. App. Term 1965)
Case details for

Meguin v. Kramer

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH R. MEGUIN et al., Respondents, v. JOSEPH KRAMER, Appellant

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, Second Department

Date published: Dec 22, 1965

Citations

49 Misc. 2d 572 (N.Y. App. Term 1965)
268 N.Y.S.2d 191

Citing Cases

Vegliack v. Mazzella

Where recovery has been permitted, it involved, in the words of Atkin v. Hill, Darlington Grimm ( 15 A.D.2d…

Ellis v. Gold

This argument is meritless. In Vitanza v City of New York ( 48 A.D.2d 41, 44, affd 40 N.Y.2d 872), a case…