Legal Opinion

Karnal v. Horovitz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided May 16, 1947Published

1Per curiam

The written memorandum sufficiently identifies defendant Horovitz as vendor (cf. Lerand Corporation v. Meltzer, 267 N. Y. 343; Irvmor Corp. v. Rodewald, 253 N. Y. 472) to satisfy the requirements of the Statute of Frauds (Real Property Law, § 259). It is open to plaintiff under the cases cited to plead that Horovitz acted for the corporate defendant, 49 West 72nd Street Corp., as undisclosed principal, without specifying whether the agency was in writing. The corporate defendant is not entitled to a dismissal of the complaint on motion based on affidavits on the theory that Horovitz was not…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Canajoharie National Bank v. DiefendorfNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  2. Matthews v. . MatthewsNew York Court of Appeals · 1897
  3. Irvmor Corp. v. RodewaldNew York Court of Appeals · 1930
  4. Lerand Corporation v. MeltzerNew York Court of Appeals · 1935
  5. Karnal v. HorovitzNew York Supreme Court · 1946

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

Powered by the Exa API