Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the defendants' contention, the oral promise of payment made by the defendant's agent to the plaintiff was not barred by the statute of frauds. The promise represented an independent duty of payment, irrespective of the liability of the principal debtor, and was based upon new consideration (see Martin Roofing v Goldstein,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.