Hoisting Machinery Co. v. Federal Terra Cotta Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Motion by the defendant, Federal Terra Cotta Company, for a reargument or for leave to go to the Court of Appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
Smith, J.:
The plaintiff has sued the defendant for the value of materials furnished, which materials were to be used for a complete monorail system in the defendant’s yards. The claim of the defendant is, first, that these materials were furnished under a written contract and that the plaintiff, therefore, cannot recover, ignoring such contract, upon a quantum, valebat. The rule has been otherwise held in Kronau v. Weisburg (151 App. Div. 355); Schulze v. Farrell (142 id. 13); Farron v. Sherwood (17 N. Y. 227); Peltier v. Sewall (12 Wend. 386); Higgins v. Newtown & Flushing R. R. Co. (66 N.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Farron v. . SherwoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Excelsior Terra Cotta Co. v. . HardeNew York Court of Appeals · 1905
- Delafield v. Village of WestfieldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899
- Delafield v. . the Village of WestfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
- Peltier v. SewallNew York Supreme Court · 1834
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Annunziata v. FavaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960