Legal Opinion

Gerenstein v. Weiner

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided May 23, 1957PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

Plaintiff, as owner of a business for the servicing of neon signs, entered into two contracts with the defendant whereby, for a stated monthly charge, he agreed to replace defective or broken neon tubes, and also to perform other maintenance services in connection with defendant’s signs. Insofar as these contracts obligated plaintiff to replace parts which he had not manufactured or sold they are contracts of insurance, and are unenforcible since plaintiff was not licensed to do an insurance business. (Insurance Law, §§ 40, 41; cf. Automobile Ins. Co. v. Barondess, 107 Misc. 513; 1 Richards…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ollendorff Watch Co. v. PinkNew York Court of Appeals · 1938
  2. Automobile Insurance Co. of Hartford v. BarondessNew York Supreme Court · 1919

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Posner v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.New York Supreme Court · 1962
  2. Petro, Inc. v. SerioNew York Supreme Court · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API