City of New York Municipal Court, 1899

Chambers v. Goldklang

Chambers v. Goldklang
City of New York Municipal Court · Decided November 21, 1899 · Conlan
60 N.Y.S. 998 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Abraham H. Sarasohn, for appellant., Wyatt & Trimble, for respondent.

Chambers v. Goldklang

Opinion of the Court

CONLAN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered upon a verdict directed by the court at trial term, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial. The action was brought to recover commissions as broker on obtaining a loan of $15,000 on defendant’s property. A careful reading of the evidence adduced upon the trial fails to convince us that any error was committed in a direction of a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. There does not appear any serious conflict of any kind, unless it be between the defendant and one of Ms own witnesses; and, taking either view of the case, there was nothing whereon a jury could be called upon to deliberate. The result to be ascertained was a simple computation of what was 1 per cent, on $>15,000, and what was the legal interest on the ascertained sum for a given time. The defendant made no request to be permitted to go to the jury, and a subsequent motion for a new trial was ineffectual *999for any purpose without the request, or a refusal, and an exception to the charge itself.

The judgment and order appealed from must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.