Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Rose v. Spa Realty Associates – Case Brief Summary (New York)

In Rose v. Spa Realty Associates, 42 N.Y.2d 338, 366 N.E.2d 1279 (1977), the New York Court of Appeals found that the authenticity of amendments is less likely to be an issue where partial performance of the oral modification has been undertaken (Rose v. Spa Realty Associates, 42 N.Y.2d 338, 366 N.E.2d 1279, 397 N.Y.S.2d 922).

The Court ruled, however, that the partial performance must be "unequivocally referable to the oral modification." That is, the conduct asserted to overcome the no-oral modification provision must not otherwise be consistent with the original agreement.

The doctrine of equitable estoppel, distinct from partial performance, is established by showing that one party to the agreement induced another to act in reliance on the oral modification.