Opinion
February, 1920.
Judgment reversed, with costs, and complaint unanimously dismissed, with costs, upon the ground that the alleged contract upon which the action is based was void because such alleged contract or some note or memorandum thereof expressing the consideration was not in writing subscribed by the defendant or by his lawfully authorized agent. (Real Property Law, § 259.) Mills, Rich, Putnam, Blackmar and Kelly, JJ., concur.