Bates v. Braun
This text of 240 A.D. 802 (Bates v. Braun) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Order of the County Court and order of Syracuse Municipal Court reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion for judgment granted, with ten dollars costs, on the ground that the paragraph of the contract relating to the payment by the defendant of the installments agreed to be paid by the Proteetall Motor Signal, Inc., in case of default by that company embodies solely the statement of a condition for the continuance of the option and does not amount to a covenant to make the payments upon the happening of the Proteetall Company’s default. Such is the necessary grammatical construction of the clause and nothing in the option agreement taken as a whole leads to any other interpretation. All concur [803]*803except Thompson, J., who dissents and votes for affirmance; Edgcomb, J., not sitting.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
240 A.D. 802, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bates-v-braun-nyappdiv-1933.