Torres v. Thompson

29 Misc. 526, 60 N.Y.S. 790
New York Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1899·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Gaynor, J.:

It was pleaded as a defense that the work was done and material furnished under an agreement that the defendants should pay for the same by conveying to the plaintiffs certain land, and that they had tendered such conveyance. The contract was oral, and when oral evidence was offered of it by the defendants the plaintiffs’ objection to it was overruled. The exception to such ruling is not good. True, a contract for the sale of real property is void unless in writing and signed by the grantor. It does not need to be signed by the grantee; and when he pays the consideration he cannot refuse to accept the conveyance and recover back what he has paid. In such case it is only the grantor who. can raise the question of no written contract (Collier v. Coates, 17 Barb. 471; Galvin v. Prentice, 45 N. Y. 162).

The motion is denied.

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

Torres v. Thompson, 29 Misc. 526, 60 N.Y.S. 790 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1899).

29 Misc. 526 (Torres v. Thompson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

300 West End Avenue Corp. v. Warner
165 N.E. 271 (New York Court of Appeals, 1929)
Corn v. Bergmann
138 A.D. 260 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1910)
Reilly v. Steinhardt
58 Misc. 471 (New York Supreme Court, 1908)
Pelletreau v. Brennan
113 A.D. 806 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1906)