Case Name: Alfred R. Sorensen and Thomas Donigan, Respondents, v. Morris Philip, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1928-11
Citations: 225 A.D. 684
Docket Number: 
Parties: Alfred R. Sorensen and Thomas Donigan, Respondents, v. Morris Philip, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 225
Pages: 684–685

Head Matter:
Alfred R. Sorensen and Thomas Donigan, Respondents, v. Morris Philip, Appellant.

Opinion:
Judgment reversed upon the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. The learned trial court erred in directing a verdict, because a question of fact existed which should have been submitted to the jury, to wit: Whether or not the indemnity agreement was intended to cover the bond executed on May 22, 1926, upon which judgment had already been entered against the plaintiffs in this action, or whether it was intended to cover a new bond intended to be executed to provide for Berghoffen's remaining within the jail limits Furthermore, this court has heretofore held that a question of fact existed by the affirmance of the order denying a motion for summary judgment. Rich, Young, Seeger and Scudder, JJ., concur; Lazansky, P. J., dissents.