Opinion
Argued December 19, 1894
Decided January 15, 1895
Ira Shafer for appellant.
Gratz Nathan for respondents.
O'BRIEN, J., reads for affirmance.
All concur, except BARTLETT, J., dissenting, and HAIGHT, J., not sitting.
Judgment affirmed.
From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research
Conville v. Shook
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 15, 1895
39 N.E. 405 (N.Y. 1895)
Summaries of
Conville v. Shook
Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jan 15, 1895
39 N.E. 405 (N.Y. 1895)
Case details for
Conville v. Shook
Case Details
Full title:THOMAS CONVILLE, Appellant, v . SHERIDAN SHOOK et al., Respondents
Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Date published: Jan 15, 1895
Citations
39 N.E. 405 (N.Y. 1895)
39 N.E. 405
71 N.Y. St. Rptr. 341
Citing Cases
Watson v. Dodson
The mistake in such case need not be mutual. Neyland v. Neyland, 19 Tex. 427; Fox v. Sturm, 21 Tex. 409;…
Union Realty Co. v. AhernIt could only have been by mistake that the purchasers accepted a credit of $1.13 when in fact and in law…