Case Name: Charles J. Soderbery, Respondent, v. Laurelton Land Company, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1919-10
Citations: 189 A.D. 910
Docket Number: 
Parties: Charles J. Soderbery, Respondent, v. Laurelton Land Company, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 189
Pages: 910–910

Head Matter:
Charles J. Soderbery, Respondent, v. Laurelton Land Company, Appellant.

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed, with costs. We think that Feldblum v. Laurelton Land Co. (151 App. Div. 24; 210 N. Y. 594) is still authority for-a situation such as proven here — that is, where the contemplated or represented improvements have been abandoned and not merely delayed, as was the situation in Brede v. Rosedale Terrace Co. (216 N. Y. 247). In other words, we think that the decision in the Brede case should not be regarded as having impaired the authority of the Feldblum case in that respect. Jenks, P. J., Mills, Rich, Putnam and Blackmar, JJ., concurred.