Srere v. Gottesman
District Court, S.D. New York
At Taw. Action by Alfred A. Srere and Harry Srere against Mendel Gottesman and David S. Gottesman. On motion by both parties for direction of verdict.
Read the full summary
At Taw. Action by Alfred A. Srere and Harry Srere against Mendel Gottesman and David S. Gottesman. On motion by both parties for direction of verdict. This action is upon a contract between the parlies by which the defendant agreed to deliver 4,800 tons of pulp to ilie plaintiff at $1.95 per 100 pounds, deliveries to be monthly at 150 tons a month, beginning May, 1915, and ending December, 1917. The contract contained the foliowing provisions, which are the only ones of importance: “Each shipment under this contract to be considered as a separate contract, and, default of one or more…
1Opinion of the CourtEearned Eiand, District Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The plaintiffs attempted in the former action to recover upon a repudiation of the contract through the October correspondence, and failed. They necessarily exercised their putative option, arising by virtue of that correspondence, to declare the contract at an end through the defendants’ breach. This they might have done, had there been such a breach. Central Trust Co. v. Chicago Auditorium, 240 U. S. 581, 36 Sup. Ct. 412, 60 L. Ed. 811, L. R. A. 1917B, 580; Johnstone v. Milling, L. R. 16 Q. B. D. 460; Landes v. Klopstock, 252 Fed. 89, -C. C. A.-. But I…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Central Trust Co. of Ill. v. Chicago Auditorium Assn.Supreme Court of the United States · 1916
- United States v. California & Oregon Land Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Watts v. WestonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
- Landes v. KlopstockCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1918