Agress Nut & Seed Co. v. Sargiss

In view of plaintiff’s claim that there was no available market for the goods in question at the agreed time and place of shipment, plaintiff was entitled to introduce evidence of the market price of equivalent merchandise obtainable elsewhere. It was error, to exclude plaintiff’s proof on that subject. In the absence of a foreign market where equivalent merchandise could be procured, plaintiff’s damages may be determined in some other manner, as provided in subdivision 2 of section 148 of the Personal Property Law. As stated in Orester v. Dayton Rubber Mfg. Co. (228 N. Y. 134, 139): “ in…