Case Name: Helena Bogden, Respondent, v. Wingate Realty Company et al., Appellants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1964-02-06
Citations: 43 Misc. 2d 1083
Docket Number: 
Parties: Helena Bogden, Respondent, v. Wingate Realty Company et al., Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 43
Pages: 1083–1084

Head Matter:
Helena Bogden, Respondent, v. Wingate Realty Company et al., Appellants.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
February 6, 1964.
Irving Segal and Sidney Advocate for Wingate Realty Company, appellant. Raymond J. MacDonnell and Herbert M.
Katz for D & T Concrete Co., Inc., appellant. Schneider & Lichtenstein (Charles Lichtenstein of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The provision of section 192 of the Civil Court Act [now § 2203] that the jurisdiction of the Civil Court, as to causes transferred from abolished courts, shall be ' ' contracted to that of the abolished court so as to prevent this court from giving relief in such amount as could not be given by the abolished court ' ' is clear and unambiguous. The granting of plaintiff's motion to increase the damages beyond the amount which the City Court could have given was a violation of section 192.
That portion of the order granting plaintiff's motion to increase the amount demanded in the complaint should be reversed, with $10 costs, otherwise, affirmed.
Concur —G-old, J. P., ILecht and Tilzer, JJ.
Order granting motion to increase the amount demanded in the complaint reversed, otherwise affirmed.