Duplex Safety Boiler Co. v. McGinness
New York Marine Court
The complaint charges “ that the defendant on or about March 1, 1882, purchased and agreed to pay $531.85 for a boiler then in his possession belonging to the plaintiff.” The defendant answered denying that any such purchase was ever made. Upon the conclusion of the plaintiff’s case the complaint was dismissed and the plaintiff thereupon moved for a new trial, and this is the application now under consideration.
1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.
The boiler was in the defendant’s possession prior to and at the time of the alleged sale to him by the plaintiff. The price was more than fifty dollars. No part of the purchase-money was paid, and there was no contract in writing signed by either party. The sale was, therefore, void by the statute of frauds, unless the circumstances that the boiler was in the defendant’s possession at the time may be regarded as a delivery and acceptance sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirement in that regard. Upon the trial the *100complaint was dismissed upon the ground that the mere circumstance of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Shindler v. . HoustonNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
3Cited by2 opinions
- J. H. Silkman Lumber Co. v. HunholzWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
- Mommer v. FriedlanderCity of New York Municipal Court · 1886