From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bergin v. Anderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 1, 1926
215 App. Div. 832 (N.Y. App. Div. 1926)

Summary

In Bergin v. Anderson (215 App. Div. 832) the Appellate Division, Second Department, said: "Notwithstanding the plaintiff's admission of the execution of the agreement mentioned in the answer, plaintiff was entitled to show the conditions upon which the agreement was executed and delivered."

Summary of this case from Royal Indemnity Co. v. Preferred Acc. Ins. Co.

Opinion

January, 1926.


Order granting judgment dismissing the complaint upon the pleadings reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion denied, with ten dollars costs. Notwithstanding the plaintiff's admission of the execution of the agreement mentioned in the answer, plaintiff was entitled to show the conditions upon which the agreement was executed and delivered. ( Smith v. Dotterweich, 200 N.Y. 299.) Kelly, P.J., Rich, Jaycox, Manning and Young, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Bergin v. Anderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 1, 1926
215 App. Div. 832 (N.Y. App. Div. 1926)

In Bergin v. Anderson (215 App. Div. 832) the Appellate Division, Second Department, said: "Notwithstanding the plaintiff's admission of the execution of the agreement mentioned in the answer, plaintiff was entitled to show the conditions upon which the agreement was executed and delivered."

Summary of this case from Royal Indemnity Co. v. Preferred Acc. Ins. Co.
Case details for

Bergin v. Anderson

Case Details

Full title:ALBERT E. BERGIN, Appellant, v. JOHN R. ANDERSON, Respondent

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

Date published: Jan 1, 1926

Citations

215 App. Div. 832 (N.Y. App. Div. 1926)

Citing Cases

Royal Indemnity Co. v. Preferred Acc. Ins. Co.

(See, also, Grannis v. Stevens, 216 N.Y. 583, 587; Smith v. Dotterweich, 200 id. 299; Thomas v. Scutt, 127…