Legal Opinion

Ponderosa Pines, Inc. v. Queens Farm Dairy, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided May 30, 1975PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Judgment unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and a new trial granted. Memorandum: In this action for conversion of whey processing equipment by the two defendants-appellants, plaintiff offered proof that each defendant had converted some of the property which was missing from the place of plaintiff’s operations. There was no proof, however, that the defendants acted in concert or that either aided or participated in the conversion by the other. So far as it appears, their acts were several and independent. In this circumstance, the judgment granted jointly against both defendants…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Chipman v. . PalmerNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
  2. O'Donnell v. . City of SyracuseNew York Court of Appeals · 1906
  3. Zeleznik v. Jewish Chronic Disease HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1975
  4. S. & C. Clothing Co. v. United States Trucking Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1926
  5. Victor Catering Co. v. NascaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Doralee Estates, Inc. v. Cities Service Oil Company, and Third-Party v. Mgo Corp. And Monticello Gas & Oil Co., Inc., Third-PartyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
  2. CBM Equipment Corp. v. MarkwardtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
  3. Reeser v. HillAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API