Case ID: ny_225/html/0645-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Julius Bischofsky, Respondent, v. Ignatz Wohl, Appellant.
    
      Bischofsky v. Wohl, 174 App. Div. 890, affirmed.
    (Argued December 4, 1918;
    decided January 7, 1919.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered July 7, 1916, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to compel specific performance of a contract to sell real property or for damages. Defendant’s title was traced back to a deed from one Eggert who went into bankruptcy while seized of the premises and nine years before he conveyed to appellant’s predecessor in interest. Eggert’s petition' in bankruptcy did not disclose his ownership of the premises and the trial court held that his estate might still be reopened by the Federal court and that the possibility that it might be reopened rendered title unmarketable.
    
      Harry Percy David for appellant.
    
      Earl J. Helmick for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan and McLaughlin, JJ. Dissenting: His cock, Ch. J., and Crane, J.