Kaplan v. Cohen, 34 Misc. 91 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1901). · Go Syfert
Kaplan v. Cohen, 34 Misc. 91 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1901). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Louis Kaplan
v.
Gottlieb Cohen
New York Supreme Court.
Feb 15, 1901.
Published opinion
34 Misc. 91
Harry Zim for plaintiff., Weschler & Burstein for defendant.
Gaynor.
Published
Gaynor, J.

The complaint alleges that the defendant entered into a written contract to convey certain real estate to[*92] the plaintiff, and that he failed to do so on the contract day because he could not give good title. There is also the following allegation: “and in said agreement the defendant acknowledged the payment by the plaintiff of $100 in part payment of said premises.” This is not an allegation of the payment of $100 by the plaintiff to the defendant. ¡Nor is there any allegation that the plaintiff searched the title and incurred expense therein. The prayer for judgment for $167.50 is therefore based on nothing. The Us pendens is filed on the theory that the plaintiff may he given a lien by judgment on the land for the amount he paid on account and of his expenses in searching the title; but as the complaint alleges no such payment or expense there is no cause of action alleged.

The motion is granted, with $10 costs.