Francini v. B. A. & G. N. Williams, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Francini v. B. A. & G. N. Williams, Inc.

246 A.D. 218, 285 N.Y.S. 262, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9461

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 1936

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 246 A.D. 218 (Francini v. B. A. & G. N. Williams, 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

Francini v. B. A. & G. N. Williams, Inc., 246 A.D. 218, 285 N.Y.S. 262, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9461 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The contract, as alleged, if established, is not within the Statute of Frauds. (Pers. Prop. Law, § 85, subd. 2, added by Laws of 1911, chap. 571.) The judgment, however, should be reversed because there was a failure of proof of special damages in that it was never shown that defendant agreed to furnish marble different from its sample and conforming to the modified specifications of the architect, or that the run of Dover marble in the market did conform to such modified specifications. There were also prejudicial errors in the charge which need not be commented on because they are not likely to recur on a new trial.

The judgment and order should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

Judgment and order reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

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

Per Curiam.

The contract, as alleged, if established, is not within the Statute of Frauds. (Pers. Prop. Law, § 85, subd. 2, added by Laws of 1911, chap. 571.) The judgment, however, should be reversed because there was a failure of proof of special damages in that it was never shown that defendant agreed to furnish marble different from its sample and conforming to the modified specifications of the architect, or that the run of Dover marble in the market did conform to such modified specifications. There were also prejudicial errors in the charge which need not be commented on because they are not likely to recur on a new trial.

The judgment and order should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.

Judgment and order reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D. 218, 285 N.Y.S. 262, 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francini-v-b-a-g-n-williams-inc-nyappdiv-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack