Major v. Kollmorgen Optical Corp.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Major v. Kollmorgen Optical Corp.

140 Misc. 790, 251 N.Y.S. 32, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1406

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided June 22, 1931·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In view of the admissions in the answer, the contents of the various writings signed by the defendant, and the uncontradicted testimony of the plaintiff, it was error to dismiss the complaint upon the theory that the alleged contract between the parties lacked mutuality. Moreover, sufficient evidence of damage was adduced to permit the trier of the facts to find that the plaintiff was actually damaged and to fix the amount of his damage. (See Mortimer v. Bristol, 190 App. Div. 452.)

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Levy, Callahan and Untermyer, JJ.

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

Per Curiam.

In view of the admissions in the answer, the contents of the various writings signed by the defendant, and the uncontradicted testimony of the plaintiff, it was error to dismiss the complaint upon the theory that the alleged contract between the parties lacked mutuality. Moreover, sufficient evidence of damage was adduced to permit the trier of the facts to find that the plaintiff was actually damaged and to fix the amount of his damage. (See Mortimer v. Bristol, 190 App. Div. 452.)

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.

All concur; present, Levy, Callahan and Untermyer, JJ.

Major v. Kollmorgen Optical Corp., 140 Misc. 790, 251 N.Y.S. 32, 1931 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1406 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1931).

Pincite

140 Misc. 790 (Major v. Kollmorgen Optical Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related