Alexander Hamilton Institute v. Folgner

168 Misc. 358, 6 N.Y.S.2d 65, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1793
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided June 21, 1938·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defense attempts to show by parol that the written contract sued upon was to be ineffectual, if the defendant decided to discontinue the course of studies. This proof would be inadmissible (Jamestown Business College Assn. v. Allen, 172 N. Y. 291), and hence no triable issue remained.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs, and motion granted.

All concur. Present — Lydon, Frankenthaler and Noonan, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Alexander Hamilton Institute v. Folgner, 168 Misc. 358, 6 N.Y.S.2d 65, 1938 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1793 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

168 Misc. 358 (Alexander Hamilton Institute v. Folgner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jamestown Business College Assn. v. . Allen
64 N.E. 952 (New York Court of Appeals, 1902)