Legal Opinion
Lounsbury v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.
Civil Court of the City of New York
Decided March 3, 1967PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtEdward J. Greenfield, J.
On the trial of this action, in which plaintiff claimed a commission on the sale of a 5,600-ton floating dry dock, the defendant urged as a defense that in the absence of any agreement in writing for the payment of commission the claim is barred by the Statute of Frauds (General Obligations Law, § 5-701, subd. 10).
Interestingly enough, there appears to be no reported case in which the contention made by the defendant that this statute covers all claims for commissions for the sale of any inventory or fixtures has been passed upon. The Court of Appeals has recently had occasion to rule on the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Sibbald v. . the Bethlehem Iron CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Weingast v. Rialto Pastry Shop, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Freedman v. HavemeyerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Sorge v. NottNew York Supreme Court · 1962
- Clivner v. AckermanNew York Supreme Court · 1966
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Freedman v. Chemical Construction Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Yonofsky v. WernickDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1973
- Melvin Hiller, and Philip Stoller (57) (Stoller Dismissed) v. The Franklin Mint, Inc. And Joseph M. SegalCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1973
- Greystone Partnerships Group, Inc. v. Koninklijke Luchtvaart Maatschappij N.V.District Court, S.D. New York · 1993
- Shiah M. Arsham v. Walter BanciCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.