From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MID WEST CONTROL CORP. v. BURKE

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Nov 3, 1955
2 Misc. 2d 401 (N.Y. App. Term 1955)

Opinion

November 3, 1955

Appeal from the Municipal Court of the City of New York, Borough of Manhattan, JOSEPH RAIMO, J.

Arthur R. Silsdorf and Maurice Harbater for appellants.

Jules E. Perlman and Reuben Lesser for respondent.


There was a sharp question of fact as to whether one partner had the authority to enter into an agreement to surrender the demised premises so as to bind the partnership. Such an agreement to surrender was not in the ordinary course of the partnership business; on the contrary, it would have resulted in the entire termination of the partnership business (Partnership Law, § 20, subd. 3). It was error to direct a verdict in favor of the landlord.

The final order should be reversed and new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellants to abide the event.

EDER, SCHREIBER and HECHT, JJ., concur.

Final order reversed, etc.


Summaries of

MID WEST CONTROL CORP. v. BURKE

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Nov 3, 1955
2 Misc. 2d 401 (N.Y. App. Term 1955)
Case details for

MID WEST CONTROL CORP. v. BURKE

Case Details

Full title:MID WEST CONTROL CORP., Landlord, Respondent, v. JAMES BURKE et al.…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Nov 3, 1955

Citations

2 Misc. 2d 401 (N.Y. App. Term 1955)
146 N.Y.S.2d 459

Citing Cases

Meisner v. Crane

Supreme Court determined that even if Graham and defendant were treated as partners, one could not bind the…

Camuso v. Brooklyn Portfolio, LLC

”In accordance with this provision, it has been held that where a sale of the real property of a partnership…