McClain v. Schofield
New York Supreme Court
Action by Daniel W. McClain against Benjamin Schofield and others. The complaint was dismissed on the trial, and' plaintiff moves for a new trial, on exceptions ordered to be heard at general term in the first instance. Judgment for defendants.
1Opinion of the CourtParker, J.
We agree with the trial judge that there was an account stated between the plaintiff’s firm and defendants; thereafter a payment by defendants to plaintiff of the amount which such account showed to be due; and that a dismissal of the complaint was necessarily required. The defendants were carpet manufacturers in the city of Philadelphia. Plaintiff was one of a firm of commission agents for the sale of carpets in the city of New York, and has succeeded to the interests of the firm in the claims which are the subject of this action. About the 1st of December, 1887, an agreement was entered…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Jugla v. . TrouttetNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
- Quincey v. . WhiteNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Knickerbocker v. . GouldNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Clark v. Mechanics' National BankNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1882
- Manchester Paper Company v. . MooreNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
3Cited by3 opinions
- Horowitz v. La France Industries, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1948
- Shade v. Sisson Mill & Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Shade v. Sisson Mill & Lumber Co.California Supreme Court · 1896