Boecher v. Tollner & Draycott, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Boecher v. Tollner & Draycott, Inc.

229 A.D. 801

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

DecidedMay 15, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 229 A.D. 801 (Boecher v. Tollner & Draycott, Inc.) 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

Boecher v. Tollner & Draycott, Inc., 229 A.D. 801 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment reversed upon the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. We are of opinion that the paper writing of April 20, 1922, was not a renewal of the option of purchase contained in the original lease. It purports to be a lease for five years from August 1, 1921, with a renewal privilege of such a tenancy only for a further five years. It contains no language indicating the existence of an option to purchase. The only right to such an option is contained in the original lease, and that option was good for ten years. (Masset v. Ruh, 235 N. Y. 462.) If upon the new trial it shall be satisfactorily shown that the option was exercised within the ten-year period, the plaintiff should prevail. If exercised after the ten-year period, more will have to be shown than the present record contains to connect the appellant with the transaction in such a way as to bind him to the exercise of the option at that time. Findings of fact inconsistent herewith are reversed and the conclusions of law are reversed. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty and Scudder, JJ., concur; Rich, J., concurs in result. Settle order on notice.

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

Judgment reversed upon the law and the facts and a new trial granted, costs to abide the event. We are of opinion that the paper writing of April 20, 1922, was not a renewal of the option of purchase contained in the original lease. It purports to be a lease for five years from August 1, 1921, with a renewal privilege of such a tenancy only for a further five years. It contains no language indicating the existence of an option to purchase. The only right to such an option is contained in the original lease, and that option was good for ten years. (Masset v. Ruh, 235 N. Y. 462.) If upon the new trial it shall be satisfactorily shown that the option was exercised within the ten-year period, the plaintiff should prevail. If exercised after the ten-year period, more will have to be shown than the present record contains to connect the appellant with the transaction in such a way as to bind him to the exercise of the option at that time. Findings of fact inconsistent herewith are reversed and the conclusions of law are reversed. Lazansky, P. J., Kapper, Hagarty and Scudder, JJ., concur; Rich, J., concurs in result. Settle order on notice.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 A.D. 801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/boecher-v-tollner-draycott-inc-nyappdiv-1930.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack