Legal Opinion
Pape v. Rudolph Bros.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 28, 1939PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judgment and order *1033affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: The statement of plaintiffs’ testator alleged to have been made to the president of defendant, that he would not insist on the additional amount of rental covenanted in the lease to be paid after May 1, 1937, did not create a new contract as there were no mutual promises, and it is not claimed that there was a meeting of minds on a new contract. (Moers v. Moers, 229 N. Y. 294, 301; Hopwood Ploys, Inc., v. Kemper, 263 id. 380, 384.) There was not a genuine controversy concerning the amount due from the defendant and the acceptance of a sum…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hudson v. Yonkers Fruit Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Moers v. . MoersNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
3Cited by6 opinions
- King Metal Products, Inc. v. Workmen's Compensation BoardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
- Haviland & Co. v. Sphinx Import Co.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1967
- Rein v. WagnerNew York Supreme Court · 1965
- 140 West 69th Street Corp. v. SimisCity of New York Municipal Court · 1945
- Buffalo Electric Co. v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.