Case ID: ny_241/html/0575-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Simon Wertheimer et al., Respondents, v. Rita B. Boehm, Appellant.
    
      Vendor and purchaser — contract — sale — specific performance — Frauds (Statute of) — action to compel specific performance of contract for sale of real property — defense of Statute of Frauds.
    
    
      Wertheimer v. Boehm, 213 App. Div. 849, affirmed.
    (Argued October 30, 1925;
    decided December 1, 1925.)
    Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the fourth judicial department, entered April 2, 1925, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a decision of the court on trial at Special Term. The action was for specific performance of an alleged contract for the sale of real estate which read as follows:
    “ Buffalo, 3 /7 /22.
    “ Received of Simon Wertheimer and Barney Berman $50.00 Fifty Dollars on a /c of purchasing price of $14,000. Fourteen Thousand Dollars for property 168 Allen St. $2950.00 in cash on delivery of clear title and survey with the understanding of first mortgage of $5000 at 5% and balance of $6,000.00 on a second mortgage which I agree to take for six years for six per cent interest. The lot is 36x125 feet. It is understood that any building mortgage to increase the first mortgage is allowed.
    “ RITA BUNTON BOEHM.” The defense was the Statute of Frauds, defendant claiming that the memorandum is incomplete and indefinite and does not constitute a valid legal or binding contract capable of enforcement.
    
      M. F. Dirnberger, Jr., for appellant.
    
      Adrian Block and Bernard D. Welt for respondents.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Hiscock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ.