General

Howard A. La Rose, Respondent, v. Fred Geffen, Doing Business as Balmoral Hotel, Appellant

23 A.D.2d 717·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1965·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

Howard A. La Rose, Respondent, v. Fred Geffen, Doing Business as Balmoral Hotel, Appellant. [MAJORITY] Memorandum by the Court. Appellant concedes that plaintiff “rwas entitled to recover some amount for the reasonable value of the services rendered” (but contends that the proof “was insufficient to enable the Court, as a matter of law, to fix and determine the reasonable value of the services rendered.” We find, on the contrary, that the documentary proof and the lay and expert testimony adduced by plaintiff were both credible and convincing and ample to sustain the trial court’s careful analysis and resulting determination. Judgment affirmed, with costs. Gibson, P. J., Herlihy, Reynolds, Taylor and Aulisi, JJ., concur.