Keitel v. Zimmermann
New York Supreme Court
Action by vendees for breach of contract to convey realty.
1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.
The plaintiffs, vendees in' a contract for the purchase of premises Ho. 445 West Eifty-third street, Hew York city, sue the defendants as vendors to recover back $250 deposit on the execution of the agreement, and $168.90 paid for examining the title, upon the ground that the defendants were unable to perform their undertaking. The contract-is signed by the vendors only; but this is sufficient, for the rule is settled that in equity for obtain*582ing a specific performance, as well as at law for recovering damages, the signature of the party who makes the engagement is all that the statute…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Ziehen v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Clason v. BaileyCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1817
- Van Brocklen v. . SmeallieNew York Court of Appeals · 1893
- Hine v. Manhattan Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Moser v. . CochraneNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Levin v. DietzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Stokes v. WallerCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921
- Pfeil Construction Corp. v. MoleyNew York Supreme Court · 1958
- KM v. Katonah-Lewisboro Union Free School DistrictDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2020
- Listokin v. Miller Zeiderman LLPDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2022