Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1936

Sadock v. Mitrani

Sadock v. Mitrani
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided October 30, 1936 · Cubiam
248 A.D. 470; 290 N.Y.S. 792; 1936 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6174

Counsel

John Bogart of counsel [Jacob Rosenthal with him on the brief], for the appellant., E. A. Deutschman, for the respondents.

Sadock v. Mitrani

Opinion of the Court

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-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.