Ford v. . Joyce
New York Court of Appeals
This was an action upon a promissory note. Defendants answered in substance that, by an agreement between the parties, certain deductions were to be made, and alleged that the balance had been paid.
Read the full summary
This was an action upon a promissory note. Defendants answered in substance that, by an agreement between the parties, certain deductions were to be made, and alleged that the balance had been paid. The answer alleged that a written contract was executed which was not in conformity with the parol agreement; that defendants pointed out the discrepencies, and a new writing was made which defendants signed, supposing it embodied the corrections, when in fact it was substantially the same as the first instrument. They asked to have the executed agreement reformed. No mutual mistake or fraud was…
1Opinion of the Court
Danforth, J.,
reads for reversal and new trial.
All concur ; Rapallo, J., concurring on last ground.
Judgment reversed.
2Cited by10 opinions
- Southard v. . CurleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Christopher & Tenth Street Railroad v. Twenty-third Street Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Christopher St. R. Co. v. . 23d St. R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Liberty v. HainesSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1907
- Devereux v. Sun Fire Office of LondonNew York Supreme Court · 1889
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.