Legal Opinion · Dissent
Fitzgerald v. Sherman
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 14, 1923Published
1DissentDavis, J.
My disagreement with the prevailing opinion arises not in the statement of legal principles, but in the facts as disclosed by the evidence.
Hone was by occupation a real estate agent or broker. Ordinarily he would have limited authority. (Stone v. U. S. Title Guaranty & Indemnity Co., 159 App. Div. 679; affd., 217 N. Y. 656; 9 C. J. 525.) But there is no reason why Sherman could *55not have clothed him with greater authority or held him out as his agent with such authority.
There were no written instructions. Sherman wanted a parcel of land upon which to erect an automobile station and sales room.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Olcott v. . Tioga Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1863
- Schley v. . FryerNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Tyson v. . PostNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Stone v. . United States Title Guaranty and Indemnity Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Stone v. United States Title Guaranty & Indemnity Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.