Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Menig

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Menig

248 A.D. 593

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

DecidedMay 15, 1936

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D. 593 (Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Menig) 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

Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. Menig, 248 A.D. 593 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

Order denying plaintiff’s motion to strike out the answer of the defendants Menig and for summary judgment, under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs. The language contained in the extension agreement, upon reliance of which the plaintiff purchased the bond and mortgage for value without knowledge of the oral representations claimed by the mortgagor to have been made by the mortgagee prior to the assignment, estops the mortgagor from asserting the defense and counterclaim. The rule that a contract or covenant under seal cannot be modified by a parol unexecuted contract also applies. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Davis, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

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

Order denying plaintiff’s motion to strike out the answer of the defendants Menig and for summary judgment, under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs. The language contained in the extension agreement, upon reliance of which the plaintiff purchased the bond and mortgage for value without knowledge of the oral representations claimed by the mortgagor to have been made by the mortgagee prior to the assignment, estops the mortgagor from asserting the defense and counterclaim. The rule that a contract or covenant under seal cannot be modified by a parol unexecuted contract also applies. Lazansky, P. J., Young, Davis, Johnston and Adel, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D. 593, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prudential-insurance-co-of-america-v-menig-nyappdiv-1936.