Legal Opinion

Cinefot International Corp. v. Hudson Photographic Industries, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 30, 1963PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Chief Judge Desmond.

In passing on the correctness of the Appellate Division’s dismissal of this complaint we must give our attention to these questions of law:(1) As to a fully performed oral agreement for one year of service unenforcible under the Statute of Frauds because the terminal date of performance was more than a year after the making of the pact, may the conduct of the parties in continuing the relationship beyond the agreed expiration date be taken as proof of their intent to renew for another year?(2) If the answer to the foregoing is “ yes ”, does this complaint fail to set out a…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Adams v. . FitzpatrickNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Brightson v. H. B. Claflin Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1904
  3. Chamberlain v. . PrattNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
  4. Chase v. . Second Avenue Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1884
  5. Treffinger v. . M. Groh's SonsNew York Court of Appeals · 1906

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Goldman v. White Plains Center for Nursing Care, LLCNew York Court of Appeals · 2008
  2. Harper v. Cedar Rapids Television Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1976
  3. Curren v. Carbonic Systems, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
  4. Hawes Office System Inc. v. Wang Laboratories, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1982
  5. Geller v. Reuben Gittelman Hebrew Day SchoolAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API