Conried Metropolitan Opera Co. v. Brin
New York Supreme Court
Action to recover the damages agreed to be paid by the defendant for Ms breach of a contract with the plaintiff to sing as a first tenor at the latter’s operatic and concert performances during an agreed period.
1Opinion of the CourtBischoff, J.
Interpretation abominates equivocation. Its office is to elucidate the intention of the contracting parties; and, when their language is free from incertitude, it is the court’s duty to give it effect in harmony with its apparent sense and meaning. Portia’s fame as a jurist seems spurious when it is noted that, conceding as she did the validity of her client’s contract, her measure of Antonio’s obligation as surety for Bassanio proceeded from the merest quibble. It was evasion, not interpretation. In the contract under review, the plaintiff is referred to as the company and the defendant as…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hart v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Sun Printing and Publishing Assn. v. MooreSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Lake County v. RollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
- Howard v. . DalyNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Calderon v. Atlas Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Peabody v. Richard Realty Co.New York Supreme Court · 1910
- Simon v. LindenCity of New York Municipal Court · 1919