Berth v. W. G. Knapp Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Berth v. W. G. Knapp Co.

215 A.D. 693

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 15, 1925

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 215 A.D. 693 (Berth v. W. G. Knapp Co.) 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.

Bluebook

Berth v. W. G. Knapp Co., 215 A.D. 693 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying motion to set aside order of the trial court dismissing plaintiff’s complaint, and for a new trial, reversed upon the law, and motion granted, with costs to abide the event. According to the evidence the original contract was [694]*694fully performed, and hence the Statute of Frauds was not a defense. The contract sued upon was one implied by law from the performance of the original contract, and is not affected by the Statute of Frauds. According to the evidence it would seem plain that the original hiring was for a year at $6,000 per year. Even if there was a doubt as to the intention of Mr. Knapp when he said “ All right ” in response to plaintiff’s offer, it would be for the jury to determine. Kelly, P. J., Rich, Manning, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying motion to set aside order of the trial court dismissing plaintiff’s complaint, and for a new trial, reversed upon the law, and motion granted, with costs to abide the event. According to the evidence the original contract was [694]*694fully performed, and hence the Statute of Frauds was not a defense. The contract sued upon was one implied by law from the performance of the original contract, and is not affected by the Statute of Frauds. According to the evidence it would seem plain that the original hiring was for a year at $6,000 per year. Even if there was a doubt as to the intention of Mr. Knapp when he said “ All right ” in response to plaintiff’s offer, it would be for the jury to determine. Kelly, P. J., Rich, Manning, Young and Kapper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 A.D. 693, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berth-v-w-g-knapp-co-nyappdiv-1925.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack