Simons v. Rubin

145 Misc. 761, 260 N.Y.S. 776, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1649
City of New York Municipal Court·Decided December 7, 1932·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

La Fetba, Ch. J.

This is an action to recover the purchase price of certain stock. The evidence discloses that the plaintiffs on a certain day in September acted as brokers for the defendant, their customer, in the purchase of the stock in question. It was a transaction, between agent and principal and not one between two principals as claimed by the defendant. The Statute of Frauds has no application. (Friedman & Co. v. Newman, 255 N. Y. 340.) Evidence bearing upon the agency subsequent to the order was admissible upon the question of fact involved. The stock was duly tendered to the defendant.

Judgment is directed in favor of the plaintiffs for the sum of $1,016.83, with interest thereon from the 10th day of September, 1929, together with costs.

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

Simons v. Rubin, 145 Misc. 761, 260 N.Y.S. 776, 1932 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1649 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1932).

145 Misc. 761 (Simons v. Rubin) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stott v. Greengos
230 A.2d 154 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1967)
Backus v. Taplin
81 F.2d 444 (Seventh Circuit, 1936)