Legal Opinion · Dissent

Siegel v. Spear & Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 11, 1921Published

Appeal by the defendant, Spear and Company, from a determination and order of the Appellate Term, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 10th day of December, 1919, affirming a judgment of the City Court of the City of New York.

1Dissent

Smith, J. (dissenting):

I am unable to find any consideration for the promise upon which plaintiff has recovered. In the prevailing opinion *848consideration is found, first, in the abandonment of the plaintiff’s purpose to insure in reliance upon defendant’s promise to procure the insurance. This is an application of what is spoken of in the text books as a promissory estoppel. In Williston on Contracts (§ 139) the doctrine is discussed, and it is there said: “ Doubtless there are reasons of justice for enforcing promises which have led the promisee to incur any detriment on the faith of them,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Ridgway v. GraceNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
  2. Korn v. WeirAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1904

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

Powered by the Exa API