INDOVISION ENTERP'S. v. CARDINAL EXP.


44 A.D.2d 228 (1974)

Indovision Enterprizes, Inc., Appellant, v. Cardinal Export Corporation, Respondent

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

April 9, 1974.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jeremiah S. Gutman of counsel (Donald L. Doernberg with him on the brief; Levy, Gutman, Goldberg & Kaplan, attorneys), for appellant.

Mortimer G. Levine for respondent.

MARKEWICH and CAPOZZOLI, JJ., concur with STEUER, J.; McGIVERN, P. J., dissents in an opinion.


STEUER, J.

The operative facts are not in dispute, though the conclusions to be drawn from them are. Under the familiar rule, if under any viable interpretation an issue is presented, summary judgment will not lie.

On September 25, 1973, plaintiff sent a letter to defendant. The letter is inartistically phrased and the issue is as to its meaning as an expression of the will of the parties. It is necessary to set out the pertinent parts of this...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases