Fiske v. Peebles
City of New York Municipal Court
The plaintiff, a resident of New Jersey, but doing- business in the city of New York, entered into a contract with one Isaacs, who resided and did business in New Jersey.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff, a resident of New Jersey, but doing- business in the city of New York, entered into a contract with one Isaacs, who resided and did business in New Jersey. The contract bears, date, New York, March 25,1-886, and its material parts are as follows: ■ “ Wilson Fiske agrees to sell to Louis Isaacs, a certain printing press, type, stand, cases, cabinets, etc., - to be delivered at 121 Montieello avenue, Jersey City, N. J., and Louis Isaacs hereby agrees to buy the said press and materials as above described, and to pay therefor, at the time and in the manner following, etc., and to…
1Opinion of the Court
McAdam, Ch. J.
The contract between the plaintiff and Isaacs was one of conditional sale only; no title passed to *745the latter, and the purchase from him by the defendants was wrongful, as it conferred upon them no right or title, whatever. See cases collated in Rathbun v. Waters (1 City Ct. Rep., 36), Brown v. Thurber (1 City Ct. Rep., 322). The defense that the contract was not filed according to the statutes of New York, in regard to conditional sales (Laws 1884, chap. 315), is untenable, for the reason? that all the contracting parties resided in New Jersey, the delivery under the contract…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Green v. Van BuskirkSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Hervey v. Rhode Island Locomotive WorksSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Hoyt v. . Thompson'sNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Boyce v. . BrockwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Pomeroy v. AinsworthNew York Supreme Court · 1856
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.