Honsinger v. . Mulford
51 N.E. 1090, 157 N.Y. 674, 1898 N.Y. LEXIS 603
Opinion
We think this case should be affirmed upon the prevailing opinion below and upon our decision in Matthews v. Matthews (154 N. Y. 288), an authority precisely in point upon the necessity of pleading the defense of the Statute of Frauds, in order that it may be available upon the trial to defeat the validity of the contract sued upon by the plaintiff upon that ground.
Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
All concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Honsinger v. . Mulford, 51 N.E. 1090, 157 N.Y. 674, 1898 N.Y. LEXIS 603 (N.Y. 1898).
51 N.E. 1090 (Honsinger v. . Mulford) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Harmon v. Alfred Peats Co.
216 A.D. 368 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1926)
Williamsburg City Fire Insurance v. Lichtenstein
181 A.D. 681 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1918)
Leggett v. Campbell
96 N.Y.S. 639 (New York Supreme Court, 1905)
Bennett v. Mahler
90 A.D. 22 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904)
Fanger v. Caspary
87 A.D. 417 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Banta v. Banta
82 N.Y.S. 113 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1903)
Hardt v. Recknagel
62 A.D. 106 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1901)