From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Soderbery v. Laurelton Land Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 1, 1919
189 App. Div. 910 (N.Y. App. Div. 1919)

Opinion

October, 1919.


Judgment affirmed, with costs. We think that Feldblum v. Laurelton Land Co. ( 151 App. Div. 24; 210 N.Y. 594) is still authority for a situation such as proven here — that is, where the contemplated or represented improvements have been abandoned and not merely delayed, as was the situation in Brede v. Rosedale Terrace Co. ( 216 N.Y. 247). In other words, we think that the decision in the Brede case should not be regarded as having impaired the authority of the Feldblum case in that respect. Jenks, P.J., Mills, Rich, Putnam and Blackmar, JJ., concurred.


Summaries of

Soderbery v. Laurelton Land Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 1, 1919
189 App. Div. 910 (N.Y. App. Div. 1919)
Case details for

Soderbery v. Laurelton Land Company

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES J. SODERBERY, Respondent, v. LAURELTON LAND COMPANY, Appellant

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

Date published: Oct 1, 1919

Citations

189 App. Div. 910 (N.Y. App. Div. 1919)