Weeks v. Miller

¶1We see no reason to interfere with the exercise of the court’s discretion in declining to direct specific performance of the agreement of January 20, 1917, in which the defendant had granted many extensions of time without result except repeated delays by plaintiff. The judgment dismissing the complaint is, therefore, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Jenks, P. J., Mills, Putnam, Kelly and Jaycox, JJ.