Lawwly

Mitchill v. Lath

Court of Appeals of New York

160 N.E. 646 (1928)

Relevant factsFree

Charles Lath (defendant) owned a farm and, across the road on another person's property, an icehouse; when he contracted in 1923 to sell the farm to Catherine Mitchill (plaintiff) for $8,400, she found the icehouse objectionable and, alongside the written sale agreement, Lath orally agreed to remove it the following spring. After Mitchill took possession, Lath refused to remove the icehouse, and she sued for specific performance of the oral agreement; the trial court and appellate court both ruled for Mitchill, and Lath appealed.

IssueFree

Whether written or oral evidence that constitutes a parol collateral agreement distinct from and independent of a final written agreement is admissible in a court of law.

Unlock the full brief

Free accounts read 20 full briefs. No card required.

Related cases