Legal Opinion

Vanguard Military Equipment Corp. v. Schulein

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

Decided July 2, 1943PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The challenged counterclaim and cross complaint alleges an oral agreement between defendant-respondent, plaintiff and the impleaded defendants, which is vague, indefinite and uncertain. From the facts set forth the full intention of the parties to the alleged contract cannot be ascertained with a reasonable degree of certainty. Such an agreement is unenforcible. (Varney v. Ditmars, 217 N. Y. 223, 228.) The essential terms of a contract and the facts showing damage upon which the action is based must be pleaded. (King v. Krischer Mfg. Co., Inc., 220 App. Div. 584, 585; Janvier, Inc., v. Baker,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Varney v. . DitmarsNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Walter Janvier, Inc. v. BakerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930
  3. King v. Krischer Manufacturing Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
  4. Garcin v. Granville Iron Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1930

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ziegler v. Mancuso & Alessio, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954
  2. Holt v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API