This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1922. Excerpt: ... First Department, January, 1922. Vol. 199 Court in the former proceeding, authorized the respondent to enter into a new relationship with the owner of the premises, and that, acting upon such authorization, the respondent did negotiate with a third party, who, in the meantime, had obtained control of the premises, and had attorned to said third party for the rental of said premises. This claim of the respondent, Levine, grows out of testimony given upon the trial of the present proceeding where he testified as follows: "In February--I don't know what date--the marshal come around in my place and said, 'Levine I will have to chase you from the store.' So I telephoned to Goldberg when the marshal was in my place and I told Mr. Goldberg, 'The marshal is right here in my place.' And Goldberg told me he lost the case in court--' Do what you can.' I should try to settle with the landlord." Levine testified further that, following this talk with Goldberg, he entered into negotiations with one Werstein, who had a store the next door to that occupied by the respondent, and that Harris, the owner, was present in Werstein's store. Levine was not permitted to testify as to his talk with Harris in the absence of the plaintiff, Goldberg, but did testify that a week or two later Goldberg was in his store, and that he told Goldberg that Werstein did not want him to continue in the store, as he carried the same line of goods; that he, Levine, begged of Werstein to be permitted to remain in the store and that Werstein finally, without giving him a lease, permitted him to remain at a rental of $175 per month, and that, pursuant to such arrangement, he had paid Werstein rent for the succeeding months of February, March, April and May. The respondent claims that when he calle...