History
  • No items yet
midpage
Sadock v. Mitrani
248 A.D. 470
N.Y. App. Div.
1936
Check Treatment
Peb Cubiam.

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event, upon the ground that the court erroneously excluded parol evidence offered by the plaintiff tending to establish that by mutual mistake, or by mistake on the part of the plaintiff and fraud on the part of the defendants, the written contract fails correctly to express the true agreement of the parties. (Susquehanna S. S. Co. v. Andersen & Co., 239 N. Y. 285.)

Present —- Mabtin, P. J., McAvoy, Untebmyeb, Dobe and Cohn, JJ.

Judgment unanimously reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Case Details

Case Name: Sadock v. Mitrani
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Oct 30, 1936
Citation: 248 A.D. 470
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.