Legal Opinion

Innis, Pearce & Co. v. G. H. Poppenberg, Inc.

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

Decided June 30, 1925PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Crouch, J.:

Plaintiff brought this-action to recover for goods sold and delivered to defendant. It may be assumed that the complaint was verified, though the printed record does not so show. Annexed to the complaint was a schedule setting forth the items of the claim and the reasonable value and agreed price of each. The separate items were not numbered, but were gathered together into three *790numbered groups. Defendant’s' answer was (1) a general denial coupled with an admission that plaintiff had “ sold to defendant * * * certain goods, wares and merchandise; ” (2) payment; and (3) tender.…

2Cited by20 opinions

  1. Raytone Plumbing Specialities, Inc. v. Sano Construction Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
  2. Green v. Harris Beach & WilcoxAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  3. Teal, Becker & Chiaramonte v. SuttonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  4. International Milk Co. v. CohenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
  5. Summit Security Services, Inc. v. Main Street Lofts Yonkers, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API