Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

188 Misc. 1036

Kaplan v. Walsh

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · decided 1947-04-24

Cited by 3 later decisions — most recently September 2010

3 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1947-04-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1Memorandum The answering affidavit presents no triable issue of fact. Under the contract in question, defendants were limited to the retention of plaintiff’s deposit in the sum of $500 in ease of his default, which amount under the contract must be regarded as liquidated damages. Defendants could not set up a counterclaim for damages in excess of that amount. (St. Cyr v. Sothern, 140 App. Div. 888.)

¶2MacCrate, Steinbrink and Golden, JJ., concur.

¶3The order should be unanimously reversed on the law, with $10 costs to plaintiff, and motion for summary judgment striking out defendants’ counterclaim granted.

¶4Order reversed, etc.

/188/misc/1036 · .json · Public domain