Pierce v. Apple

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Pierce v. Apple

92 N.Y.S. 1142

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedFebruary 23, 1905

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 92 N.Y.S. 1142 (Pierce v. Apple) 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

Pierce v. Apple, 92 N.Y.S. 1142 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinions

McCALL, J.

Irrespective of the question that the contract sought to be enforced by the defendant was not a contract made by the then owner of the premises, but was one executed by a person purporting to be the agent of a firm that never had any title to the premises, this judgment should be reversed, because, even if it had been made by the owner, it was a mere collateral personal undertaking, which did not bind the plaintiff in this action. Judgment reversed, with costs, and judgment directed for the plaintiff, with costs.

SCOTT, J., concurs.

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

McCALL, J.

Irrespective of the question that the contract sought to be enforced by the defendant was not a contract made by the then owner of the premises, but was one executed by a person purporting to be the agent of a firm that never had any title to the premises, this judgment should be reversed, because, even if it had been made by the owner, it was a mere collateral personal undertaking, which did not bind the plaintiff in this action. Judgment reversed, with costs, and judgment directed for the plaintiff, with costs.

SCOTT, J., concurs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 N.Y.S. 1142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pierce-v-apple-nyappterm-1905.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack