Legal Opinion
Cundill v. A. W. Millhauser Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 15, 1927PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
Order denying defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. H there was any ambiguity in the contract, due to the use of the words “No arrival, no sale,” the intention of the *835parties can only be determined after a trial of the issues. Kelly, P. J., Manning, Young, Lazansky and Hagarty, JJ., concur.
2Cited by1 opinion
- Cundill v. A. W. Millhauser Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1930