Legal Opinion · Dissent

Rapid Safety Fire Extinguisher Co. v. Hay-Budden Manufacturing Co.

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1902Published

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of Xew York, borough of Manhattan, rendered in favor of the plaintiff, upon a trial had before the court, without a jury. The nature of the action and the material facts are stated in the opinion.

1Dissent

Greekbaum, J. (dissenting).—

The plaintiff corporation leased to the defendant ten fire extinguishers upon an agreed rental, to be paid at stated times.

The alleged agreement is in the nature of a request, upon a printed form prepared by the plaintiff, signed by defendant and addressed to the plaintiff, requesting the latter to place in defendant’s premises the fire extinguishers, for which defendant agrees to pay a stipulated sum semi-annually in advance, and to “ hereby lease same for a period of five years from this date, subject to the conditions endorsed upon the back hereof, which are…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Paul v. . Travelers' Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1889
  2. Young v. . LearyNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  3. Ames v. BeldenNew York Supreme Court · 1854
  4. American Preservers Co. v. DrescherThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1893
  5. Pitney v. Glens Falls InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1871

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

Powered by the Exa API