General

John A. Tolishus, Respondent, v. The Rudolph Wublitzer Company, Appellant

186 A.D. 935·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1918·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

John A. Tolishus, Respondent, v. The Rudolph Wublitzer Company, Appellant. [MAJORITY] Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event. Held, that there is a failure of proof in this case that the plaintiff became “ the successor in interest of the Lyceum Amusement Co., Inc.,” and, therefore, the plaintiff cannot maintain this action for damages, even if there was a failure upon the part of the defendant to give the notice required by the statute, justifying a retaking of the piano and a sale thereof. All concurred. See Pers. Prop. Law (Consol. Laws, chap. 41; Laws of 1909, chap. 45), § 65 et seq.— [Rep.