The trial court's finding of fact that there was no meeting of the minds as to the terms of the sale, reviewed in a light most favorable to plaintiff, was a fair interpretation of the conflicting testimony and documentary evidence adduced at trial. The testimony of defendant's "expert" was ambiguous and susceptible of an interpretation supportive of plaintiff's position (see, Richstone v Q-Med, Inc.,
Let's get started
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.