Legal Opinion

Universal No. 2 Corp. v. Ainbinder

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided June 20, 1960PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum by the Court.

This is an action for brokerage commissions. By the terms of the binder prepared by plaintiff’s employee, the sale of defendant’s property was “subject to lawyer’s approval ” and “ subject to consummation of contract of purchasers ’ house. ’ ’ Immediately above the words £ £ lawyer’s approval ” is written the name “ Sarnoff ”, which is the name of purchasers’ attorney ^ Plaintiff’s employee, upon being asked during cross-examination whether she inserted the words as to “lawyer’s approval”, stated: “I can’t answer it. It’s ambiguous.”

*614There was evidence that the contract…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gillet v. . Bank of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
  2. Sattler v. . HallockNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
  3. Moffat v. Gerry Estates, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
  4. Thompson v. WallerAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1947

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Graff v. BilletAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984

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

Powered by the Exa API