O'Neil v. Battie, 61 Hun 622 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1891). · Go Syfert
O'Neil v. Battie, 61 Hun 622 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1891). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
6 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Cited for
Other citing cases1 with no pin cite or quoted language on record
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
O'Neil
v.
Battie
New York Supreme Court.
Sep 25, 1891.
Published opinion
61 Hun 622
1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 145
Edgar Hull, for appellant. Gibson & Van Kirk, for respondent.
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
Per Curiam.

We are satisfied that Moran was trustee defacto. This is shown by the record of the meeting, by the appeal taken by the present defendant for the purpose of setting aside Moran’s election, and by the decision of the superintendent ordering a new election. As such, his written contract with the plaintiff was binding. That writing, accepted by her, constituted the contract, whatever prior verbal agreement there may have been. It is hardly possible in any case that a written contract should be made, unless the parties have previously arranged the. matter verbally. The writing supersedes all the verbal arrangements. The plaintiff performed her part of the contract so far as she was permitted. She was therefore entitled to recover for what she had performed, and damages for what she lost by being prevented from performing. The complaint contained only one count, but no objection was taken to this form of pleading. The plaintiff’s inability to obtain other work after she was discharged by the defendant was proved. We see no error in the trial. Judgment affirmed, with costs against defendant personally. All concur.