Legal Opinion

Morris Glasser & Son, Inc. v. Jonwal Construction Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided January 18, 1946PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum Per Curiam.

Plaintiff cannot recover for the alleged extra work upon the alleged oral contract relied on or upon the claim that the written contract was modified by the oral agreement. Paragraph “ 9 ” of the agreement expressly provides that such a claim may not be made unless it is in writing and signed by the defendant; the alleged oral modification is, therefore, ineffective. (See Real Property Law, § 282, subd. 1; Personal Property Law, § 33-c. ) Also, the architect’s decision that the alleged extra work is not such but is included by the provisions of the specifications is…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. Perrin v. Stempinski Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1961

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

Powered by the Exa API