Legal Opinion

Rosen v. Rose

The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo

Decided July 1, 1895PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Action by Louis Eosen against Morris Rose for specific performance.

1Opinion of the CourtMcADAM, J.

The plaintiff seeks specific performance of an alleged oral agreement, by which the defendant was to execute a lease of real property, in this city for one year, with the privilege of two years more. Such a contract relates to the leasing of lands for more than one year (Chretien v. Doney, 1 N. Y. 419; House v. Burr, 24 Barb. 525; Kramer v. Cook, 7 Gray, 550; Voege v. Ronalds, 83 Hun. 114, 31 N. Y. Supp. 353), and, to be valid, must be in writing, subscribed by the party to be charged (2 Edm. Rev. St. 139, § 6; Wood, Landl. & Ten. § 188). Though the plaintiff has not received possession, he…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Chretien v. . DoneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
  2. House v. BurrNew York Supreme Court · 1857
  3. Voege v. RonaldsNew York Supreme Court · 1894

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Merchants State Bank v. RuettellNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Nasanowitz v. HaneAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1896
  3. Ramer v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Larkin v. MartinNew York Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Levy v. HinrichsenNew York Supreme Court · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API