From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schwob v. Goodwin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1916
176 App. Div. 885 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)

Opinion

December, 1916.


As the case now stands it is controlled by the "second" clause of the written contract between Schwob and Goodwin. That clause is clear and apparently free from ambiguity. The trial court erred in its interpretation. The "fifth" and "sixth" findings of fact, and the "first," "second" and "third" conclusions of law are reversed. The judgment is reversed, with costs of this appeal to the appellants, and a new trial is granted, costs to abide the final award of costs. Thomas, Carr, Stapleton, Mills and Putnam, JJ., concurred.


Summaries of

Schwob v. Goodwin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 1, 1916
176 App. Div. 885 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)
Case details for

Schwob v. Goodwin

Case Details

Full title:ALEXANDER M. SCHWOB, Respondent, v. HENRIETTA V. GOODWIN and HENRY H…

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

Date published: Dec 1, 1916

Citations

176 App. Div. 885 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)