Williams v. Horton Realties, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Williams v. Horton Realties, Inc.

283 A.D. 889, 129 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5654

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 12, 1954

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 283 A.D. 889 (Williams v. Horton Realties, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Williams v. Horton Realties, Inc., 283 A.D. 889, 129 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5654 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1954).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action by a vendee to reform or rescind a written contract for the sale of real property and for other relief the amended complaint was dismissed on defendant’s motion at the close of plaintiff’s case. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment entered thereon. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The record clearly indicates that the plaintiff failed to prove the allegations of the amended complaint and therefore was not entitled to a reformation of the agreement or a rescission thereof. In view of this fact we do not pass upon the comment in the court’s opinion regarding the limitations of equity in regard to the instant case. Present — Nolan, P.J., Adel, Wenzel, Schmidt and Murphy, JJ.

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

In an action by a vendee to reform or rescind a written contract for the sale of real property and for other relief the amended complaint was dismissed on defendant’s motion at the close of plaintiff’s case. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment entered thereon. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. The record clearly indicates that the plaintiff failed to prove the allegations of the amended complaint and therefore was not entitled to a reformation of the agreement or a rescission thereof. In view of this fact we do not pass upon the comment in the court’s opinion regarding the limitations of equity in regard to the instant case. Present — Nolan, P.J., Adel, Wenzel, Schmidt and Murphy, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D. 889, 129 N.Y.S.2d 766, 1954 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5654, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-horton-realties-inc-nyappdiv-1954.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack