Pascoe v. Electromatic Mfg. Corp.
| Decision Date | 02 April 1957 |
| Parties | Clifford PASCOE and Maitland Brenhouse, doing business as Artek-Pascoe, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. ELECTROMATIC MANUFACTURING CORP., Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
J. E. Birdsall, New York City, for defendant-appellant.
Sam Eisenberg, New York City, for plaintiffs-respondents.
Before BREITEL, J. P., and BOTEIN, RABIN, VALENTE and McNALLY, JJ.
Order unanimously affirmed with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondents. In affirming we do not overlook the case of lucio V. curran, 2 N.Y.2d 157, 157 N.Y.S.2d 948. it is clear from theLucio case that the courts look behind the release when an issue is raised with respect to what the parties intended to release. This the court did in the Lucio case, and, on a motion for summary judgment, held that the affidavits clearly showed that it was intended that the release cover 'the instant dispute'. The court had before it the simple issue as to whether the affidavits raised any triable question of fact in connection with the intention of the parties. Applying the same test to this case we must consider whether the parties intended by the releases to release a claim with respect to excise taxes. We can make no finding with respect thereto since the affidavits present a triable issue in that regard. The resolution of that issue is for the trial court.
Order filed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nadal v. Childs Securities Corp.
...courts look behind the release when an issue is raised with respect to what the parties intended to release.' (Pascoe v. Electromatic Mfg. Corp., 3 A.D.2d 818, 161 N.Y.S.2d 365). That such an issue exists here is clearly apparent from the documents and affidavits, and consequently, we may n......
-
Meil v. Syracuse Constructors, Inc.
...cover matters which the parties did not desire or intend to dispose of. And, in the case of Clifford Pascoe et al. v. Electromatic Manufacturing Co., reported at 3 A.D.2d 818, 161 N.Y.S.2d 365, 366, it was held that 'the courts look behind the release when an issue is raised with respect to......
-
Martin v. Traver
...alleged defects pertain to the building contract and not to the extras. In Pascoe and Brenhouse d. b. a. Artek-Pascoe v. Electromatic Manufacturing Corp., 3 A.D.2d 818, 161 N.Y.S.2d 365, the Court 'In affirming (an order denying defendant's motion for summary judgment) we do not overlook th......
- People v. Kelly