Bazak International Corp. v. Mast Industries, Inc.
New York Court of Appeals
1DissentAlexander, J.
In my view, the purchase orders at issue here, which describe themselves as offers and do not otherwise indicate the existence of a completed agreement are not "sufficient against the sender” (UCC 2-201 [2]) because they fail to "indicate that a contract for sale has been made between the parties” (UCC 2-201 [1]). Consequently they are not confirmatory memoranda sufficient to satisfy the Statute of Frauds and plaintiffs contract cause of action was properly dismissed. Furthermore, plaintiff has failed to plead facts *126sufficiently independent of its contract claim to sustain its second cause of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Channel Master Corp. v. Aluminium Limited Sales, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1958
- Scheck v. FrancisNew York Court of Appeals · 1970
- Morris Cohon & Co. v. RussellNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Harry Rubin & Sons, Inc. v. Consolidated Pipe Co. of America, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1959
- Southwest Engineering Co., Inc. v. Martin Tractor Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1970
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.