J. Oppenheimer & Co. v. Lehman

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

J. Oppenheimer & Co. v. Lehman

138 N.Y.S. 1092

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 16, 1912

StatusPublished

This text of 138 N.Y.S. 1092 (J. Oppenheimer & Co. v. Lehman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J. Oppenheimer & Co. v. Lehman, 138 N.Y.S. 1092 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There was no evidence of acceptance by plaintiff of the “orders” (Exhibits A, B, and C). Although denominated on their face as “contracts,” they were not signed by defendants, and were unilateral at the time plaintiff was notified (defendants’ letter oí November 25th, Exhibit D) that “your ‘orders’ ” are canceled. This letter did not admit the existence of a contract, which, at the same time, it attempted to cancel, but expressly referred to the papers as “orders” merely, a word which does not necessarily imply that the “order” has ripened into a contract.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

There was no evidence of acceptance by plaintiff of the “orders” (Exhibits A, B, and C). Although denominated on their face as “contracts,” they were not signed by defendants, and were unilateral at the time plaintiff was notified (defendants’ letter oí November 25th, Exhibit D) that “your ‘orders’ ” are canceled. This letter did not admit the existence of a contract, which, at the same time, it attempted to cancel, but expressly referred to the papers as “orders” merely, a word which does not necessarily imply that the “order” has ripened into a contract.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

138 N.Y.S. 1092, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-oppenheimer-co-v-lehman-nyappterm-1912.