Steinhardt v. Buel

City of New York Municipal Court

Steinhardt v. Buel

16 N.Y.S. 153, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 692, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 362

DecidedOctober 15, 1891

StatusPublished

This text of 16 N.Y.S. 153 (Steinhardt v. Buel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Steinhardt v. Buel, 16 N.Y.S. 153, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 692, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 362 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Pincite

Opinion

Ehrlich, C. J.

The question whether there was a rehiring by the defendant was in conflict, and should have been sent to the jury for their determination. There is room for doubt whether the terms, conditions, and details of the rehiring were settled by the parties, so as to give the result the effect of a lease. The defendant had refused to renew on the old terms, and negotiations were opened looking forward to an entirely new agreement, and whether it was consummated was a question which could not be withheld from the jury. The court directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, to which the defendant excepted. This error requires that the judgment be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant, to abide the event.

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

Ehrlich, C. J.

The question whether there was a rehiring by the defendant was in conflict, and should have been sent to the jury for their determination. There is room for doubt whether the terms, conditions, and details of the rehiring were settled by the parties, so as to give the result the effect of a lease. The defendant had refused to renew on the old terms, and negotiations were opened looking forward to an entirely new agreement, and whether it was consummated was a question which could not be withheld from the jury. The court directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, to which the defendant excepted. This error requires that the judgment be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant, to abide the event.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 N.Y.S. 153, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 692, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 362, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steinhardt-v-buel-nynyccityct-1891.