Kaplan v. Feinstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kaplan v. Feinstein

164 A.D. 898, 148 N.Y.S. 1124

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1914

StatusPublished

This text of 164 A.D. 898 (Kaplan v. Feinstein) 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

Kaplan v. Feinstein, 164 A.D. 898, 148 N.Y.S. 1124 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event, on the grounds, first, that it affirmatively appears that the terms of the composition agreement were varied from by the defendants without the consent of the plaintiffs, and it does not appear that plaintiffs waived strict performance thereof; and second, there is not a fan- preponderance of evidence of tender of performance of such agreement to plaintiffs on the part either of defendants or the United Hovelty Company. Jenks, P. J., Burr, Carr, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

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

Judgment and order reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide the event, on the grounds, first, that it affirmatively appears that the terms of the composition agreement were varied from by the defendants without the consent of the plaintiffs, and it does not appear that plaintiffs waived strict performance thereof; and second, there is not a fan- preponderance of evidence of tender of performance of such agreement to plaintiffs on the part either of defendants or the United Hovelty Company. Jenks, P. J., Burr, Carr, Rich and Putnam, JJ., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 A.D. 898, 148 N.Y.S. 1124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kaplan-v-feinstein-nyappdiv-1914.