Case ID: ny_248/html/0584-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Henry S. Quick, Respondent, v. Alfred E. Clegg et al., Appellants.
    
      Sale — contract — interpretation of provision that purchaser will assume and pay all income and excess profit taxes assessed against seller by reason of the sale.
    
    
      Quick v. Clegg, 222 App. Div. 137, affirmed.
    (Argued May 8, 1928;
    decided May 29, 1928.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered January 6, 1928, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict directed by the court. The action was to recover upon a written contract whereby plaintiff agreed to sell to defendant Clegg certain shares of stock for a sum stated and the further consideration that the purchaser “ will assume and pay all income and excess profit taxes for the year 1918, which are assessed against the party of the first part by reason of the sale of the above-mentioned stock.” The question was as to the meaning of this provision. The trial court held that the parties intended the seller to have, without deduction for payment of tax, the profit which the sale gave him.
    
      Herbert Noble for appellants.
    
      Joseph R. Kelley and George F. Handel for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews, Kellogg and O’Brien, JJ. Not sitting: Lehman, J.