Legal Opinion
Monhof v. Happy
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Decided June 28, 1932PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Per curiam
Plaintiff sues for work, labor and services, but on her own showing her claim for same would be barred by the Statute of Limitations. She claims, however, a payment on account to avert the effect of the statute. Defendant shows that at the time the payment was made the following agreement was entered into:
*209“ Dec. 14/29
“ William G. Happy
“ 43 Leonard Street
“ New York.
“ Miss Ida Monhof.
“ I.O.U. Six hundred and eighty dollars in full settlement of any and all claims which you may have against me to date. Same to be paid by me at my convenience. ; WM. G. HAPPY. “ O.K
“ Ida Monhof.”
Whether or not…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Tebo v. . RobinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Blair v. LynchNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Work v. BeachNew York Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by2 opinions
- Siepka v. BogulskiNew York Supreme Court · 1937
- Mayer v. MiddlemissAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1946