Legal Opinion

Saklaris v. Evangelista

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 18, 1956PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJoseph M. Conroy, J.

This is a consolidated action, tried by the court without a jury.

In one of the two actions consolidated, Frederick A. Pope seeks to recover from George Saklaris upon three causes of action: overcharges in rent; treble damages; and attorney’s fees. In the other action, Saklaris seeks to recover from the Evangelistas and Bernardinos (hereinafter referred to as defendants) the damages sustained by him as a result of their fraud plus whatever damages Pope recovers against him.

Pope is clearly entitled to recover on his first and third causes of action, the second cause of action (for treble…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Ettlinger v. . WeilNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
  2. Kaston v. Nathan Zimmerman & George Orlove & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1920
  3. Hellinger v. AbelesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Skrine v. StaimanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1968
  2. Montagnino v. BrojerNew York City Court · 1960
  3. Garcia v. DeibertAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960

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

Powered by the Exa API