Titterington v. Colvin
George A. Titterington, as Executor of Morris M. Titterington, Deceased, Appellant, v. Charles H. Colvin Et Al., Respondents
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.
This court affirmed without opinion upon the ground that, since the action was one at law for damages and not in equity and, therefore, proof was *322 required of actual fraud, the Appellate Division had correctly reversed and granted a new trial. The appellant having stipulated for judgment absolute the only question presented for decision was the correctness of the reversal by the Appellate Division and that having been shown, an affirmance by this court followed. We do not approve the ruling below that the contract was void under Topken, Loring & Schwartz, Inc., v. Schwartz ( 249 N. Y. 206 ). The motion for reargument should be denied.
Crane, Ch. J., Lehman, O’Brien, Hubbs, Crouch, Loughran and Finch, JJ., concur.
Motion denied.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.