From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Neu v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 8, 1906
113 App. Div. 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)

Opinion

June 8, 1906.

I.R. Oeland [ George D. Yeomans with him on the brief], for the appellant.

Alfred J. Gilchrist, for the respondents.


The parties consented to try the issues as if in an action for money had and received. The attorneys under their agreement were entitled to one-half of the sum as adjusted. The sum paid in settlement as established by the uncontradicted evidence is $150. This must be taken as the basis of the attorneys' claim ( Pilkington v. Brooklyn Heights R.R. Co., 49 App. Div. 22), and, therefore, the judgment could not exceed seventy-five dollars. The judgment must be reversed and a new trial granted, unless the plaintiffs within twenty days consent to a reduction thereof to seventy-five dollars without costs, in which case it is affirmed, without costs.

HIRSCHBERG, P.J., WOODWARD, JENKS, HOOKER and MILLER, JJ., concurred.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event, unless the plaintiffs within twenty days consent to a reduction of the recovery to seventy-five dollars without costs, in which case it is affirmed, without costs.


Summaries of

Neu v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 8, 1906
113 App. Div. 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)
Case details for

Neu v. Brooklyn Heights Railroad

Case Details

Full title:JACOB NEU and ALFRED J. GILCHRIST, Copartners Doing Business under the…

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

Date published: Jun 8, 1906

Citations

113 App. Div. 446 (N.Y. App. Div. 1906)
99 N.Y.S. 290