Frank v. Thomson
This text of 230 A.D. 741 (Frank v. Thomson) 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
Judgment reversed upon the law, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs. The memorandum sued upon was not a complete contract and by its terms, even in the form accepted by the Special Term, it left open for future agreement material elements in the deal between the parties with respect to the property involved. The memorandum expressly provided that the restrictions stated were not final and as stated were just an outline. The restrictions, therefore, were a subject upon which the parties had not agreed with finality, and the express language of the memorandum so indicates. Likewise, the memorandum expressly provided that the release clauses per acre were “ to be agreed upon,” and there is no evidence in the record that these clauses and the terms thereof were in fact ever agreed upon. Findings of fact and conclusions of law inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings and conclusions will be made. Lazansky, P. J., Rich, Kapper, Hagarty and Carswell, JJ., concur. Settle order on notice.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
230 A.D. 741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frank-v-thomson-nyappdiv-1930.