From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MAGO v. HANSSEL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 1, 1928
225 App. Div. 720 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)

Opinion

November, 1928.

Appeal from Supreme Court, Erie County.

Present — Hubbs, P.J., Clark, Sears, Crouch and Sawyer, JJ. Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.


For the purposes of this motion, which is equivalent to a demurrer, we deem the pleading sufficient. The word "damage," however, is ambiguous and it may be that upon the trial extrinsic evidence would be admissible to show the intent of the parties to use the word as including total destruction. Evidence on the trial would also probably disclose which party was responsible for the language used, and to that extent aid construction. All concur, except Sears, J., who dissents and votes for reversal on the law on the ground that under the terms of the charter party as a whole, total loss is to be included within the word "damage."


Summaries of

MAGO v. HANSSEL

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 1, 1928
225 App. Div. 720 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)
Case details for

MAGO v. HANSSEL

Case Details

Full title:BERNARD N. MAGO, Appellant, v. FRANK G. HANSSEL, Respondent

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

Date published: Nov 1, 1928

Citations

225 App. Div. 720 (N.Y. App. Div. 1928)