Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Freint v. Gilmore

Decided: January 31, 1933.

ABRAHAM H. FREINT, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
IRENE I. GILMORE, LOUIS LIEBOWITZ AND INVESTORS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS



On appeal from the Bergen County Circuit Court.

For the appellant, Howard Mackay.

For the respondent Gilmore, Arthur C. Mullen.

For the respondent Liebowitz, John J. Breslin, Jr.

Parker

The opinion of the court was delivered by

PARKER, J. The plaintiff appeals "from the judgment rendered in the above-entitled cause * * * upon the following grounds:

"1. Because the verdict of the jury was contrary to law, and inconsistent.

"2. Because the court committed error in withdrawing from the jury the consideration of the liability of the defendant Irene I. Gilmore.

"3. Because the court erroneously held as a matter of law that partnership existed between the plaintiff and the defendant Irene I. Gilmore.

"4. Because the court erroneously directed a verdict for the defendant Irene I. Gilmore."

When the "judgment rendered" is examined, it appears that the rule for judgment recites a verdict for plaintiff against the corporate defendant for $3,627.80 and in favor of Liebowitz against the plaintiff, and directs final judgment to be entered against said corporation for that amount, with costs. There is no direction for a judgment as respects Liebowitz; and defendant Gilmore is not mentioned at all, except in the caption to the rule. The judgment itself follows the rule, running against the corporation alone and without mention of either Liebowitz or Gilmore.

The substantial points that the counsel for appellants undertakes to argue are, first, that the judgment cannot stand because a verdict against the corporation necessarily involved a verdict against Liebowitz, its president and agent, who, according to plaintiff, had made the alleged fraudulent representations on which the suit was based; and secondly, that the court erred in withdrawing from the jury the plaintiff's claim as against the defendant Mrs. Gilmore, and in holding that there was a ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.