Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/In re Bruch

In re Bruch

255 A.D. 913, 8 N.Y.S.2d 73, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5841
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedNovember 23, 1938
StatusPublished

This text of 255 A.D. 913 (In re Bruch) 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
In re Bruch, 255 A.D. 913, 8 N.Y.S.2d 73, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5841 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1938).

Opinions

Hill, P. J., Crapser and Heffernan, JJ., concur; Rhodes, J., dissents, with an opinion; McNamee, J., dissents, on the ground that the letter to Lora Hastings’ attorneys was indefinite, and was based upon “ some agreement ” not stated and, therefore, the content of the agreement was a question of fact to be proved, and evidently the assignments were only steps in carrying out an undisclosed and underlying agreement. The decree is based on an agreement as found by the surrogate. I do not think the question of parol evidence is involved; neither do I believe the doctrine of fiduciary relation or dominating personality is in question. There appears to be no question of dominating influence.

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

Related

Whitney v. . Martine
88 N.Y. 535 (New York Court of Appeals, 1882)
Cowee v. . Cornell
75 N.Y. 91 (New York Court of Appeals, 1878)
Miller v. . Schloss
113 N.E. 337 (New York Court of Appeals, 1916)
Dolan v. . Cummings
86 N.E. 1122 (New York Court of Appeals, 1908)
Carpenter v. . Taylor
58 N.E. 53 (New York Court of Appeals, 1900)
Matter of Lyon
194 N.E. 682 (New York Court of Appeals, 1935)
In Re the Accounting of Peck
69 N.E. 1129 (New York Court of Appeals, 1903)
Moore v. . Moore
5 N.Y. 256 (New York Court of Appeals, 1851)
Hull v. . Hull
122 N.E. 252 (New York Court of Appeals, 1919)
McMahon v. . MacY
51 N.Y. 155 (New York Court of Appeals, 1872)
Sturtevant v. . Sturtevant
20 N.Y. 39 (New York Court of Appeals, 1859)
In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Schroeder
113 A.D. 204 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1906)
Dolan v. Cummings
116 A.D. 787 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1907)
In re the Judicial Settlement of the Final Account of Proceedings of Lester
172 A.D. 509 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1916)
In re the Judicial Settlement of the Account of Schummers
210 A.D. 296 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1924)
In re Fulton
253 A.D. 494 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1938)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
255 A.D. 913, 8 N.Y.S.2d 73, 1938 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5841, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-bruch-nyappdiv-1938.