Legal Opinion
Urband v. Lubell
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 3, 1927PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Per curiam
The evidence sustains a verdict that the plaintiff fulfilled the conditions of the contract for the payment of a commission, and the exceptions to the rulings upon the defendants’ requests to charge do not point to any errors that call for a reversal.
The verdict was improperly amended by the addition of interest. The cause was tried at Trial Term on November 13, .1925. After this term had ended, an order was made at Special Term whereby interest was added from April 24, 1923, the date of the employment. We think the power to amend did not outlast the term at which the verdict had been…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Dalrymple v. . WilliamsNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Hodgkins v. . MeadNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Duerr v. Consolidated Gas Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Fremd v. HalstedAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1918
3Cited by14 opinions
- Klepper v. Seymour House Corp. of Ogdensburg, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1927
- Allan Fox Co. v. WohlNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- McLaughlin v. BrinckerhoffAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928
- First International Pictures, Inc. v. F. C. Pictures Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1941
- Demms v. BlanchardNew York Supreme Court · 1934
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.