Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Monadnock Cutlery Co. v. Bernard Wasser, Inc. 35 Misc.2d 162

← Cases

Monadnock Cutlery Co. v. Bernard Wasser, Inc.

35 Misc.2d 162 Court Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department, Decision date 1962-06-14 English

Contents

Majority

p. 162
Monadnock Cutlery Co., Inc., Appellant, v. Bernard Wasser, Inc., Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
June 14, 1962.
p. 163
Newman, Aronson & Neumann (Edwin Ostrow of counsel), for appellant. Irving Levine (Donald Weinberger of counsel), for respondent.

Under section 31 of the Personal Property Law (Statute of Frauds), there may be more than one memorandum, only one of which is required to be signed. The unsigned memorandum may be connected with the signed memorandum by parol evidence. The writings in this case pose a triable issue as to compliance with the statute. Oral testimony may be elicited with a view toward establishing defendant’s guarantee by showing a connection between the documents and the defendant’s assent thereto (Crabtree v. Elizabeth Arden Sales Corp., 305 N. Y. 48 ).

The order granting summary judgment and the judgment entered thereon should be reversed, and the action remanded for a trial of the issues, with $10 costs to plaintiff-appellant.

Concur — Hecht, J. P., Hoestadter and Tilzer, JJ.

Order reversed, etc.

Cases cited