Mayer v. Child
JULES MAYER v. EDWIN F. CHILD and EDNEY S. TIBBEY
- Area
- civil
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
By the Court:
The contract between Laeour and Klopenstine was for the purchase of 100 shares of mining stock for the sum of $1,350. No part of the stock was delivered, nor was any portion of the purchase money paid, nor was any note or memorandum of the sale or transaction made or signed by any person. Under our statute of frauds the contract was void, and its assignment to the defendants furnished no consideration for the promise declared on. (Sherman v. Barnard, 19 Barb. 291.)
Judgment affirmed.
Cited by
- Berkey v. Halm Civ. 17656 · 1950-12-08
- McCarthy v. Pope No. 5159 · 1878-07-01