Schulman v. Neubardt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Schulman v. Neubardt

72 A.D.2d 811, 421 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14084

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

DecidedNovember 26, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 72 A.D.2d 811 (Schulman v. Neubardt) 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

Schulman v. Neubardt, 72 A.D.2d 811, 421 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14084 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for specific performance of a partnership agreement, defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated November 10, 1978, which, after a nonjury trial, inter alia, granted plaintiff judgment for certain sums as specific performance of the agreement. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by deleting the second and third decretal paragraphs thereof and substituting therefor provisions (1) granting judgment to plaintiff to the extent of directing defendants to render an accounting of the partnership affairs and (2) otherwise dismissing the complaint. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to plaintiff. The evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to establish an oral partnership agreement. Although the evidence did not prove a memorandum sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds, part performance by the plaintiff’s decedent served to remove the agreement from that statute. Therefore, plaintiff is entitled to an accounting, but may not enforce the terms of the unsigned draft agreement. Damiani, J. P., Gulotta, Margett and Gibbons, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, for specific performance of a partnership agreement, defendants appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated November 10, 1978, which, after a nonjury trial, inter alia, granted plaintiff judgment for certain sums as specific performance of the agreement. Judgment modified, on the law and the facts, by deleting the second and third decretal paragraphs thereof and substituting therefor provisions (1) granting judgment to plaintiff to the extent of directing defendants to render an accounting of the partnership affairs and (2) otherwise dismissing the complaint. As so modified, judgment affirmed, with costs to plaintiff. The evidence adduced at trial was sufficient to establish an oral partnership agreement. Although the evidence did not prove a memorandum sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds, part performance by the plaintiff’s decedent served to remove the agreement from that statute. Therefore, plaintiff is entitled to an accounting, but may not enforce the terms of the unsigned draft agreement. Damiani, J. P., Gulotta, Margett and Gibbons, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 A.D.2d 811, 421 N.Y.S.2d 912, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14084, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schulman-v-neubardt-nyappdiv-1979.