Legal Opinion · Dissent

Acme Road Machinery Co. v. Town of Bridgewater

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

Decided May 15, 1905Published

Appeal by the defendant, The Town of Bridgewater, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in thé office of the clerk of the county of Herkimer on the 28th day qf November, 1903, upon the report of a referee. The action was brought to recover the contract price, of a road machine alleged to have been sold by the plaintiff to" the commissioner of highways of the defendant town.

1Dissent

McLennan, P. J. (dissenting):

While the evidence is -in some respects conflicting, we think it fairly supports the material findings of fact found by the learned referee, viz., that on. the. 8th day of March, 1902, one Milton Tripp, who was then the sole commissioner of highways of the deferidant, had negotiations ^with the plaintiff’s superintendent which resulted in an agreement by the commissioner to take and purchase from the plaintiff a road machine at the price of $225-, provided the town board of the defendant would consent to the purchase and would approve of the same; that on the 5th…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. McDonald v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
  2. Osterhoudt v. . RigneyNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
  3. People Ex Rel. Myers v. . BarnesNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
  4. Wells v. . Town of SalinaNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  5. Morey v. Town of NewfaneNew York Supreme Court · 1850

7 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