From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Feltman v. Manesse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 1, 1934
241 App. Div. 839 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)

Opinion

April, 1934.


Judgment reversed on the law and the facts, with costs, and judgment rendered in plaintiff's favor for the sum of $11,657.75, with interest from November 22, 1929, being the difference between the contract price and the market value of the stock on November 22, 1929, when the stock was tendered by appellant to the respondents, with costs. Appeal from order dismissed. In our opinion, there was an offer by Manesse Co. to purchase the stock in question from the appellant, which was accepted by the appellant by a parol agreement and by his tender of the stock when the same was issued and while the respondents' offer to purchase the stock was outstanding. The undisputed testimony is that plaintiff refused to sell to Civic Co., Inc., because of its lack of financial responsibility and that the credit was given by plaintiff, at the request of Civic Co., Inc., to the respondents Manesse Co., and that they agreed to purchase the stock and pay plaintiff therefor. The uncontradicted evidence is that it is the rule that a tender of 600 shares of an order for 650 is a sufficient tender. Lazansky, P.J., Carswell, Scudder and Tompkins, JJ., concur; Hagarty, J., dissents and votes for affirmance.


Summaries of

Feltman v. Manesse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 1, 1934
241 App. Div. 839 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)
Case details for

Feltman v. Manesse

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES FELTMAN, Appellant, v. LOUIS MANESSE and Another, Copartners…

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

Date published: Apr 1, 1934

Citations

241 App. Div. 839 (N.Y. App. Div. 1934)

Citing Cases

Steinthal v. Cohn

Any damages which arose from the breach of this agreement through appellant's refusal to repurchase must be…