Legal Opinion

Feinsot v. Burstein

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided November 15, 1913PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment of the City .Court of the city of New York dismissing the complaint upon the merits.

1Opinion of the CourtBijur, J.

The only issue involved in this appeal is whether a clause in a lease providing for a deposit of $2,000 as security, and speaking of the same as liquidated damages, shall be construed as constituting such sum liquidated damages in the technical sense of the word, or as a penalty. It was held on a previous appeal to this court (78 Misc. Rep. 259) that, so far as the terms of the lease itself were concerned, the sum was deposited as a penalty, and the court granted a new trial in order that the surrounding circumstances might be examined to ascertáin whether their effect would be to modify this…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Caesar v. . RubinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
  2. Feinsot v. BursteinAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1912

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Feinsot v. BursteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1914
  2. Fields Holding Co. v. Chanbrook Realty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1936

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API