Stanley Court Realty & Construction Co. v. Ballard

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Stanley Court Realty & Construction Co. v. Ballard

108 N.Y.S. 973

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 5, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 108 N.Y.S. 973 (Stanley Court Realty & Construction Co. v. Ballard) 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

Stanley Court Realty & Construction Co. v. Ballard, 108 N.Y.S. 973 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The justice was well authorized to find that the greater weight of the evidence favored the fact of an actual agreement of leasing for one year, entered into with the plaintiff corporation by the defendant’s wife in his name, and ratified by him. The ratification was amply sufficient to bind the defendant to the oral agreement made, and the substantial issue was directed to the terms of that agreement, whether a lease or a mere option. That the understanding was not for an option is indicated by the writings of the parties, which, in the choice of words, appear to refer to some concluded lease; and the testimony for the plaintiff as to the oral agreement is thus rendered the more probable. The question was simply one of credibility, and the justice, who saw and heard the witnesses, must be deemed to have determined the issue correctly.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

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

PER CURIAM.

The justice was well authorized to find that the greater weight of the evidence favored the fact of an actual agreement of leasing for one year, entered into with the plaintiff corporation by the defendant’s wife in his name, and ratified by him. The ratification was amply sufficient to bind the defendant to the oral agreement made, and the substantial issue was directed to the terms of that agreement, whether a lease or a mere option. That the understanding was not for an option is indicated by the writings of the parties, which, in the choice of words, appear to refer to some concluded lease; and the testimony for the plaintiff as to the oral agreement is thus rendered the more probable. The question was simply one of credibility, and the justice, who saw and heard the witnesses, must be deemed to have determined the issue correctly.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 N.Y.S. 973, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stanley-court-realty-construction-co-v-ballard-nyappterm-1908.