Samstag Hilder Brothers v. Ottenheimer
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action to recover the price of merchandise sold, brought to and tried by the Court of Common Pleas in New Haven County, Booth, Acting-Judge; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff for $260, and appeal by the defendant Weil. Error and new trial ordered. The plaintiff is a corporation located in New York City, and is engaged in the manufacture, importation, and sale of fancy goods, novelties, notions and the like.
Read the full summary
Action to recover the price of merchandise sold, brought to and tried by the Court of Common Pleas in New Haven County, Booth, Acting-Judge; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff for $260, and appeal by the defendant Weil. Error and new trial ordered. The plaintiff is a corporation located in New York City, and is engaged in the manufacture, importation, and sale of fancy goods, novelties, notions and the like. From October 30th, 1909, until December 30th, 1912, the defendants were copartners in the manufacture and sale of corsets at New Haven, Connecticut, under the firm name…
1Opinion of the CourtRoraback, J.
One of the principal questions presented by the reasons of appeal is whether Ottenheimer, by virtue of his authority to represent the firm of Ottenheimer & Weil, could, in a transaction such as the record discloses in this case, make a contract binding upon the partnership in New Haven. It cannot be seriously claimed that this contract was within the scope of the partnership business of the defendant. It had nothing to do with the manufacture and sale of corsets in New Haven, in which the defendant company was engaged. It was not a company matter in regard to which each partner would, in his…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Morgan v. FarrelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1890
- Town of Ansonia v. CooperSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
- Union National Bank of Rahway v. UnderhillNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Kimbro v. BullittSupreme Court of the United States · 1860
- Goodwin v. Town of East HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Harper v. Delaware Valley Broadcasters, Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1990
- Active Market, Inc. v. LeightonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1938
- Landow Co., Inc. v. MaisanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- Block v. Admr., Unemployment Comp. ActConnecticut Superior Court · 1950
- Buonome v. Boni, No. Cv90307300 (Nov. 5, 1993)Connecticut Superior Court · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.