People v. Osborn

New York Court of Appeals

People v. Osborn

307 N.E.2d 47, 33 N.Y.2d 833, 351 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 877

DecidedDecember 27, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 307 N.E.2d 47 (People v. Osborn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Osborn, 307 N.E.2d 47, 33 N.Y.2d 833, 351 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 877 (N.Y. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: In exchange for the transfer of certain lands to be used for park purposes, the State agreed to permit the grantor the exclusive right, along with State vehicles, to operate his vehicles on the transferred land following vesting of title in the State. This exchange was the result of arm’s length negotiations between the parties, fundamental to the contract and which uniquely benefited the grantor. Such a bargain for benefit to both parties was consideration sufficient to support this agreement. The approval of the Comptroller required by the contract was, under circumstances where no funds were to be transferred to the grantor, purely a ministerial act, in effect a condition subsequent, eventually accomplished which would not affect the existence or enforceability of the contract.

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Breitbl, Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones and Wachtler.

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

Order affirmed, without costs, in the following memorandum: In exchange for the transfer of certain lands to be used for park purposes, the State agreed to permit the grantor the exclusive right, along with State vehicles, to operate his vehicles on the transferred land following vesting of title in the State. This exchange was the result of arm’s length negotiations between the parties, fundamental to the contract and which uniquely benefited the grantor. Such a bargain for benefit to both parties was consideration sufficient to support this agreement. The approval of the Comptroller required by the contract was, under circumstances where no funds were to be transferred to the grantor, purely a ministerial act, in effect a condition subsequent, eventually accomplished which would not affect the existence or enforceability of the contract.

Concur: Chief Judge Fuld and Judges Burke, Breitbl, Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones and Wachtler.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

307 N.E.2d 47, 33 N.Y.2d 833, 351 N.Y.S.2d 975, 1973 N.Y. LEXIS 877, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-osborn-ny-1973.