Case ID: nys_68/html/0835-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BLANCHARD, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

EARLY v. KRAUSS.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    February 25, 1901.)
    Finding—Conflicting Evidence—Review.
    Where the trial court found for plaintiff on conflicting evidence, a judgment in his favor will not be reversed.
    Appeal from municipal court, borough of Manhattan, Second district.
    Action by Frank Early against Bernard Krauss, as one of the marshals of the city of New York. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before ANDREWS, P. J., and O’GORMAN and BLANCHARD, JJ.
    Ó. J. Hochstadter, for appellant.
    H. Levy, for respondent.
   BLANCHARD, J.

This appeal simply involves questions of fact. The appellant, as one of the marshals of the city of New York, under an execution against one Michael McGinn and in favor of William P. Barker and others, entered the store of the respondent at 119th street and Park avenue, and levied upon the goods therein as the goods of Michael McGinn. He took them away from the store, and sold them, and this action was brought by the respondent to recover the value of. the goods thus levied upon and carried away. It appears that Mc-Ginn formerly owned the store, and carried on business there; that he had sold the store and its contents to one Van Praag, an auctioneer, who in turn had sold the same to the respondent. It was claimed by the appellant that the transfer to Van Praag by McGinn, as well as the transfer by Van Praag to the respondent, were fraudulent, and that the goods levied upon and taken away by the marshal were in fact the property of McGinn. The evidence in the case does not sustain that contention, and, as the trial court has resolved the controverted questions of fact in favor of the respondent, it follows that the judgment must be affirmed, with costs. All concur.