Opinion
October 15, 1951.
In an action to compel specific performance of a contract for the sale of real property, judgment dismissing the complaint at the close of plaintiff's case reversed upon the law and the facts, and a new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide the event. The record establishes that the contract prepared by the corporate seller's attorney, who was one of its three directors, was presented to and executed in triplicate by the appellant purchaser and one part thereof delivered to him upon his paying $2,100, the down payment thereby required to be paid upon its execution. Upon the trial the contract, marked for identification, was excluded from evidence over appellant's objection. It is our opinion that the contract should have been received in evidence and other excluded proof permitted to determine whether the subscription of the seller's name in typewriting was authorized by the seller and made with the intention of subscribing the seller's name within the intent and meaning of section 259 Real Prop. of the Real Property Law. ( Bork v. Martin, 132 N.Y. 280, 285; Landeker v. Co-Operative Bldg. Bank, 71 Misc. 517, 518; Mesibov, Glinert Levy v. Cohen Bros. Mfg. Co., 245 N.Y. 305, 310; Koch v. Regan, 272 App. Div. 920. ) Nolan, P.J., Carswell, Johnston, Sneed and MacCrate, JJ., concur.