An apartment owner rented a property to a non-profit organization for the purpose of operating a synagogue. After the death of the owner, the non-profit contended that the rental agreements were only for appearance and the owner granted it, in a memorandum of understanding signed between the parties, a nonrevocable, unlimited right to use the apartment, free of charge.
The Court held that there was only a rental agreement between the non-profit and the owner of the apartment, which had expired. When a party to an agreement contends the existence of an oral agreement or that existing agreements are agreements for appearance only, then they bear the burden of proving such. When it comes to claims made against an estate, the burden of proof is increased because the deceased can not come forward and contradict such. Thus, the party contending that a certain agreement is only an apparent agreement must present the background and circumstances that led the parties to sign an apparent agreement and indicate the purpose that the agreement sought to achieve. Here, the non-profit did not present any need for which it was required to create an apparent agreement or the circumstances that led the parties to sign such an agreement and a contention of an oral agreements is inconsistent with existing written documents that are dated later and the fact that the memorandum lacks material details. Therefore, the only agreements determining the relationship between the parties are the lease agreements which expired and the non-profit does not have any right in the property.