Steinman v. Olafson

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Steinman v. Olafson

1 Misc. 2d 50, 149 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1955 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2114

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 22, 1955

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1 Misc. 2d 50 (Steinman v. Olafson) 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

Steinman v. Olafson, 1 Misc. 2d 50, 149 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1955 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2114 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

No time of performance having been fixed in the contract, a reasonable time for performance is implied (Murray Co. v. Lidgerwood Mfg. Co., 241 N. Y. 455). What was a reasonable time would depend upon the existing facts and circumstances. It was, therefore, error not to allow defendant to testify to conversations had with plaintiff before the agreement was signed, not for the purpose of varying the terms of the writing, but to show what the situation was when the agreement was signed in order that it might be determined what was a reasonable time for performance on the part of plaintiff. It was also error to exclude the testimony of defendant’s attorney as to conversations had with plaintiff.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed, on the law and facts, and a new trial granted, with $30 costs to defendant to abide the event.

Kleinfeld, Pette and Di Giovanna, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

No time of performance having been fixed in the contract, a reasonable time for performance is implied (Murray Co. v. Lidgerwood Mfg. Co., 241 N. Y. 455). What was a reasonable time would depend upon the existing facts and circumstances. It was, therefore, error not to allow defendant to testify to conversations had with plaintiff before the agreement was signed, not for the purpose of varying the terms of the writing, but to show what the situation was when the agreement was signed in order that it might be determined what was a reasonable time for performance on the part of plaintiff. It was also error to exclude the testimony of defendant’s attorney as to conversations had with plaintiff.

The judgment should be unanimously reversed, on the law and facts, and a new trial granted, with $30 costs to defendant to abide the event.

Kleinfeld, Pette and Di Giovanna, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Misc. 2d 50, 149 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1955 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2114, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steinman-v-olafson-nyappterm-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack