Santini Bros. v. Smith

250 A.D. 53, 293 N.Y.S. 765, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8268
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 26, 1937·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The stipulation is enforcible but its meaning is sufficiently ambiguous to require the taking of oral proof of the surrounding facts and circumstances to determine the true meaning and intention of the parties.

The order appealed from entered December 4, 1936, should be reversed and the matter remitted to an official referee to take testimony and report to the Special Term, disposition of the motion to be held in abeyance until the coming in of the referee’s report. The order denying motion for resettlement should be affirmed.

Present — Martin, P. J., McAvoy, O’Malley, Dore and Cohn, JJ.

Order entered December 4, 1936, unanimously reversed and the matter remitted to an official referee to take testimony and report . to the Special Term, disposition of the motion to be held in abeyance until the coming in of the referee’s report. Order denying motion for resettlement unanimously affirmed.

Settle order on notice.

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

Santini Bros. v. Smith, 250 A.D. 53, 293 N.Y.S. 765, 1937 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8268 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1937).

250 A.D. 53 (Santini Bros. v. Smith) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marshall v. Marshall
52 A.D.2d 841 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1976)