From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitchell v. Murray

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 15, 1914
107 N.E. 1081 (N.Y. 1914)

Opinion

Argued December 1, 1914

Decided December 15, 1914

Walter H. Dodd and Edward H. Tatum for appellants.

Norbert Heinsheimer and Henry K. Heyman for respondent.


Judgment affirmed, with costs. Even if the original contract had not been under seal the evidence offered would not be sufficient to show that the same had been modified by a subsequent parol contract.

Concur: WILLARD BARTLETT, Ch. J., HISCOCK, COLLIN, CUDDEBACK, MILLER and CARDOZO, JJ. Absent: WERNER, J.


Summaries of

Mitchell v. Murray

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 15, 1914
107 N.E. 1081 (N.Y. 1914)
Case details for

Mitchell v. Murray

Case Details

Full title:MARY W. MITCHELL et al., as Executors of DONALD MITCHELL, Deceased…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Dec 15, 1914

Citations

107 N.E. 1081 (N.Y. 1914)
107 N.E. 1081

Citing Cases

Lion Brewery v. Fricke

Furthermore, these are instruments under seal, and it is well settled that a contract or covenant under seal…

Along-The-Hudson Co. v. Ayres

It is clear that the items specified by him and for which he has found a reasonable value of $605.47 were…