Legal Opinion
Shirley Polykoff Advertising, Inc. v. Houbigant, Inc.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 16, 1978PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order appealed from should be reversed, defendant’s cross motion granted, summary judgment entered in favor of defendant, and the certified question answered in the negative. The issue presented on this appeal is whether the alleged oral contract is within the Statute of Frauds in that "[b]y its terms [it] is not to be performed within one year from the making thereof’ (General Obligations Law, § 5-701, subd a, par 1). We hold that it is.
*922Plaintiff designed an advertisement for defendant, and has been paid some $42,500. In addition, plaintiff alleges an…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Freedman v. Chemical Construction Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1977
- North Shore Bottling Co. v. C. Schmidt & Sons, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1968
- Coinmach Industries Corp. v. DomnitchNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
3Cited by26 opinions
- South Cherry Street, LLC v. Hennessee Group LLCCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2009
- Cron v. Hargro Fabrics, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1998
- D & N Boening, Inc. v. Kirsch Beverages, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Nifty Foods Corporation v. The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company, Inc. And Pet IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1980
- Nancy Ebker, Cross-Appellee v. Tan Jay International, Ltd. And Peter J. Nygard, Tan Jay International, Ltd., Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1984
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.