Gelpcke v. Quentell
New York Supreme Court
THIS is an appeal by the plaintiffs from a judgment entered at the circuit, dismissing the complaint, with costs. This action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover from the defendant the sum of $33,419.45, with interest from April 16, 1860, being money paid and laid out by the plaintiffs for the defendant, at his request and for his account, by accepting and paying eight bills of exchange drawn by the firm of H. Eodewald & Co., at New Orleans, the agents and…
Read the full summary
THIS is an appeal by the plaintiffs from a judgment entered at the circuit, dismissing the complaint, with costs. This action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover from the defendant the sum of $33,419.45, with interest from April 16, 1860, being money paid and laid out by the plaintiffs for the defendant, at his request and for his account, by accepting and paying eight bills of exchange drawn by the firm of H. Eodewald & Co., at New Orleans, the agents and correspondents of the defendant, under an'd in conformity with a letter of credit, addressed by the defendant to the plaintiffs. By…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Cardozo, J.
Whether the ruling of the judge below was right, or not, depends upon the construction to be given to the letter of the defendant to the plaintiffs of the 24th of December, 1859. The question is whether the general authority first conferred by that letter is restrieted'by the subsequent clause which says: “ This credit is intended for advances on consignments of merchandise to my address, and you will please to keep the same in force for the coming year, 1860. It is not, however, required that'bills of lading accompany the advice of the drafts.” Did this make it the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Krakauer v. ChapmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
- Matousek v. Bank of Europe Trust Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
- Gelpcke v. QuentellNew York Supreme Court · 1873