Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

JOSEPH FLEISCHMAN et al., Respondents, v. MAX GLASER, Appellant.

MacLEAN, J.

This was an action brought to recover property wrongfully detained. As the record fails to show wrongful possession by the defendant, demand and refusal were necessary to constitute wrongful detention. Goodwin v. Wertheimer, 99 N.Y. 149; Porges v. Cohen, 23 Misc. 703. The plaintiff testifies that he never demanded the return of the property, and the bookkeeper of plaintiffs' vendor, testifying to an inquiry which, if it had been made by or for the plaintiffs, might be called a quasi demand, admits that the plaintiffs never requested him to act either on their behalf or by their authority.

For this reason, the judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

FREEDMAN, P.J., and LEVENTRITT, J., concur.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

FLEISCHMAN v. GLASER
(Jul 1, 1899)