From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whitehead v. Trussed Concrete Steel Company

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Nov 1, 1906
51 Misc. 664 (N.Y. App. Term 1906)

Opinion

November, 1906.

Adolph Hirsch Rosenfeld, for appellant.

Hastings Gleason, for respondent.


As the defendant presented accord and satisfaction as a defense the learned trial justice quite properly allowed the plaintiff to show that fraud vitiated the settlement between the parties. It was not necessary that the plaintiff should have alleged the fraud in his pleading. He could not be assumed to have known that a defense would be interposed. The record shows no error requiring a reversal.

Present: GILDERSLEEVE, DUGRO and DOWLING, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Whitehead v. Trussed Concrete Steel Company

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Nov 1, 1906
51 Misc. 664 (N.Y. App. Term 1906)
Case details for

Whitehead v. Trussed Concrete Steel Company

Case Details

Full title:JAMES W. WHITEHEAD, JR., Respondent, v . THE TRUSSED CONCRETE STEEL…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Nov 1, 1906

Citations

51 Misc. 664 (N.Y. App. Term 1906)
101 N.Y.S. 271