Court Opinion

ID: 9699183
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 20:12:31.837151+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:20:47.147159
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Chief Justice Bell :
It is extremely doubtful whether the plaintiff proved that his alleged buyer, Perelman, who incidentally never testified in his behalf, agreed to or ever heard of some of the terms and conditions fixed by the seller. While plaintiff’s evidence, taken at best for him, probably allows him to barely squeeze by an n.o.v., it is of such doubtful quality and so legally weak on several material and important legal points involved, that in the interests of justice I would grant a new trial.
In addition, I believe the charge of the Trial Judge was inadequate in that he submitted to the jury only one of defendant’s contentions, i.e., the authority of its vice-president, and completely ignored its contention that the plaintiff was required to prove that the proposed purchaser was ready, willing and able to complete the purchase.