Hagman v. Swenson
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Acosta, J.P.
Mixed transaction contracts, involving both goods and services, require a determination as to whether the transaction is predominantly one for goods or one for services, for statute of limitations purposes. In this case, the issue is raised in the context of a contract that provides for interior design services, including the procurement of furniture and other items required for achieving the desired design. Interestingly, notwithstanding that interior design services are apparently in much demand in New York, to our knowledge, there are no published opinions…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Clark-Fitzpatrick, Inc. v. Long Island Rail RoadNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
- Bauman Associates, Inc. v. H & M International Transport, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Schenectady Steel Co. v. Bruno Trimpoli General Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1974
- Schenectady Steel Co. v. Bruno Trimpoli General Construction Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Kirkpatrick v. Introspect Healthcare Corp.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1992
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Fallati v. Concord Pools, Ltd.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2017
- June Wu v. Sabrina Balsky Interior DesignsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- June Wu v. Sabrina Balsky Interior DesignsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- Newport E. Inc. v. Sviba Floral Decorators, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- Newport E. Inc. v. Sviba Floral Decorators, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.