Case Name: Delaware Mills, Inc., Respondent, v. Carpenter Brothers, Inc., Appellant
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1923-02-27
Citations: 235 N.Y. 537
Docket Number: 
Parties: Delaware Mills, Inc., Respondent, v. Carpenter Brothers, Inc., Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 235
Pages: 537–538

Head Matter:
Delaware Mills, Inc., Respondent, v. Carpenter Brothers, Inc., Appellant.
Contract — Statute of Frauds —• sufficiency of memorandum to satisfy statute.
Delaware Mills, Inc., v. Carpenter Bros., Inc., 200 App. Div. 324, affirmed. 1 *1
(Argued January 22, 1923;
decided February 27, 1923.)
Appeal from a judgment, entered April 3, 1922, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, reversing a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term without a jury and directing judgment in favor of plaintiff. The action was brought to recover damages for breach of an alleged contract growing out of the refusal by defendant of a carload of feed, known as “ Delaware stock feed,” which it had purchased of the plaintiff. The defendant interposed a general denial and set up the further defense of the Statute of Frauds, alleging that there was no sufficient memorandum signed by defendant to satisfy the provisions of the statute. The Appellate Division held that by reading together the memorandum slip containing the terms of the contract and the letters of the plaintiff of September first and October fifth with the defendant’s answers indorsed thereon, a complete written contract, or note, or memorandum, signed by the party to be charged is sufficiently established to satisfy the Statute of Frauds.
Percy V. D. Gott for appellant.
Israel T. Deyo for respondent.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.'
Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin and Crane, JJ. Absent: Andrews, J.