From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Siegel v. Goodman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 21, 1945
186 Misc. 108 (N.Y. App. Term 1945)

Opinion

December 21, 1945.

Appeal from the City Court of the City of New York, New York County, BYRNES, Ch. J.

Lawrence I. Gerber for appellants.

Bennett I. Schlessel for respondent.


MEMORANDUM


The complaint should have been dismissed at the end of plaintiff's case. Under section 33-c Pers. Prop. of the Personal Property Law, there could be no modification of the written agreement unless in writing.

The judgment should be reversed, with costs, and complaint dismissed on the merits, with costs.

HAMMER, McLAUGHLIN and EDER, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.


Summaries of

Siegel v. Goodman

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department
Dec 21, 1945
186 Misc. 108 (N.Y. App. Term 1945)
Case details for

Siegel v. Goodman

Case Details

Full title:HARRY L. SIEGEL, Respondent, v. HARRY GOODMAN et al., Appellants

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department

Date published: Dec 21, 1945

Citations

186 Misc. 108 (N.Y. App. Term 1945)
59 N.Y.S.2d 725

Citing Cases

Martens v. General Foods Corporation

We think the court erred in admitting oral testimony to prove a modification of the written contract and…

Glasser Son v. Jonwal Constr. Co.

The defendant, admittedly, owes plaintiff a balance of $5 due on other work. See, also, Siegel v. Goodman,…