Legal Opinion

Bennett v. Piscitello

Rochester City Court

Decided December 30, 1938PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTompkins, J.

On August 5, 1936, the plaintiff offered in writing to install in defendants’ macaroni plant a No. 3 AR, 141 Ray oil burner and equipment to connect with defendants’ then coal heating system. The offer was accepted in writing by defendants on June 9, 1937. Thereafter the burner was installed, the installation being completed about the middle of the following August. The *179agreed price was $1,240, one-half payable on completion and the-balance in thirty days; $920 of the purchase price has been paid. This action is brought to recover the balance of $320. There is no controversy as to the…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Day v. . PoolNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
  2. Merry Realty Co. v. Shamokin & Hollis Real Estate Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
  3. American Woolen Co. v. . SamuelsohnNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
  4. Weigel v. . CookNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
  5. Sorenson v. Keesey Hosiery Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1926

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Abdallah, Inc. v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  2. Bennett v. PiscitelloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
  3. East River Savings Bank v. Cerullo Motors, Inc., New York County Courts1987

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

Powered by the Exa API