Seelig v. Fabrics Processing Corp. , 269 A.D. 742 ( 1945 )

Order and judgment affirmed, with costs. Mo opinion. Present —- Martin, P. J., Untermyer, Dore, Cohn and Callahan, JJ.; Dore and Callahan, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse and deny the motion on the ground that under the circumstances here the question of whether there was an intent to sign the memorandum by a duly authorized agent of the party to be charged is one of fact.