In Weintraub v. Kruse (supra) the contract provided for a mortgage to be given, but failed to specify the rate of interest or the terms of payment.
Summary of this case from Drake v. SopSubmitted October 13, 1922
Decided October 27, 1922
Alexander Holtzoff and Paul Windels for appellant.
Isaac Siegmeister for respondent.
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.
Concur: HISCOCK, Ch. J., HOGAN, CARDOZO, POUND, McLAUGHLIN and CRANE, JJ. Dissenting: ANDREWS, J.
In Weintraub v. Kruse (supra) the contract provided for a mortgage to be given, but failed to specify the rate of interest or the terms of payment.
Summary of this case from Drake v. SopFull title:BENJAMIN WEINTRAUB, Respondent, v . GUSTAVE E. KRUSE, Appellant
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Oct 27, 1922
We cannot from this record determine whether or not the parties reached a definite agreement of sale. (See…
Monaco v. LevyThe contract on its face satisfies the Statute of Frauds, despite its silence as to the mortgage maturity…