From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Simons v. Rubin

City Court of New York, New York County
Dec 7, 1932
145 Misc. 761 (N.Y. City Ct. 1932)

Opinion

December 7, 1932.

I. Gainsburg [ Seymour B. Liebman of counsel], for the plaintiffs.

Samuel S. Breslin, for the defendant.


This is an action to recover the purchase price of certain stock. The evidence discloses that the plaintiffs on a certain day in September acted as brokers for the defendant, their customer, in the purchase of the stock in question. It was a transaction between agent and principal and not one between two principals as claimed by the defendant. The Statute of Frauds has no application. ( Friedman Co. v. Newman, 255 N.Y. 340.) Evidence bearing upon the agency subsequent to the order was admissible upon the question of fact involved. The stock was duly tendered to the defendant.

Judgment is directed in favor of the plaintiffs for the sum of $1,016.83, with interest thereon from the 10th day of September, 1929, together with costs.


Summaries of

Simons v. Rubin

City Court of New York, New York County
Dec 7, 1932
145 Misc. 761 (N.Y. City Ct. 1932)
Case details for

Simons v. Rubin

Case Details

Full title:MURRAY SIMONS and Others, Copartners Trading under the Firm Name and Style…

Court:City Court of New York, New York County

Date published: Dec 7, 1932

Citations

145 Misc. 761 (N.Y. City Ct. 1932)
260 N.Y.S. 776

Citing Cases

Stott v. Greengos

" Cammann v. Edwards, 340 Mo. 1, 100 S.W.2d 846, 850 ( Sup. Ct. 1936). Accord, Campbell v. Willis, 53 App.…

Cammann v. Edwards

97; Claflin v. McDonough, 33 Mo. 412; Detroit Edison Co. v. Wyatt Coal Co., 293 F. 489; Manhattan Mill Co. v.…