Stromberg v. Loiacono
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff had a claim for goods sold and delivered against one Volo. The defendant was about to buy out said Volo, when plaintiff threatened to bring an action against Volo and have an attachment issued. The defendant, fearing that such a suit and the attachment threatened would disarrange his own plans for the purchase of the property of Volo, promised the plaintiff that, if he would refrain from bringing said suit and issuing said attachment, he, defendant, would pay the plaintiff’s said claim against Volo, which amounted to forty-seven dollars. The plaintiff accepted this offer and abandoned his intention to bring the said suit. The defendant thereupon completed his contract with Volo for the purchase by defendant of the property of said Volo. Thereafter plaintiff demanded the forty-seven dollars from defendant, who refused to pay the same. The plaintiff thereupon brought this action and recovered a judgment for the amount claimed. The defendant appeals.
The agreement between plaintiff and defendant was not
The judgment must be affirmed, with costs to the respondent.
Freedman, P. J., and Bischoff, J., concur.
Judgment affirmed, with costs to respondent.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.