From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ruppert v. Singhi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 1, 1926
216 App. Div. 737 (N.Y. App. Div. 1926)

Opinion

March, 1926.

Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County.

Present — Clarke, P.J., Dowling, Merrell, McAvoy and Martin, JJ.; McAvoy, J., dissents.


Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion.


We ordered on the former appeal a new trial so that the transaction in which the note in suit was given might be shown in full. The disclosure of what the circumstances of its delivery were does not make out that such delivery was made under a condition precedent upon which alone it was to become effective, but, on the contrary, shows a contemporaneous oral agreement in the nature of a condition subsequent in contradiction of the written promise to pay, and, therefore, the evidence offered to avoid liability thereon ought not to have been admitted. For this reason, I vote to reverse and direct judgment for the plaintiff.

See 212 App. Div. 630. — [REP.


Summaries of

Ruppert v. Singhi

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 1, 1926
216 App. Div. 737 (N.Y. App. Div. 1926)
Case details for

Ruppert v. Singhi

Case Details

Full title:JACOB RUPPERT, Appellant, v. HENRY U. SINGHI, Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Mar 1, 1926

Citations

216 App. Div. 737 (N.Y. App. Div. 1926)