Court Opinion

ID: 5289803
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-01-08 02:22:52.539915+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:28:54.858019
License: Public Domain

Martin, J. (dissenting).
The option here was not a contract;
it was an offer which required acceptance. Therefore, section 25 of the General Construction Law has no application. (Ganss v. Guffey Petroleum Co., 125 App. Div. 760; Dauber v. Reznik, 200 id. 650.) In any event, the option or offer was not accepted in the terms thereof.
I, therefore, dissent and vote for affirmance.
Finch, J., concurs.
Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.