Legal Opinion

Aronette Manufacturing Co. v. Capitol Piece Dye Works, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 8, 1959PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Chief Judge Conway.

Aronette Manufacturing Company, the plaintiff-respondent, is a manufacturer of raincoats. In December, 1950 Aronette agreed to purchase textiles from Burlington Mills Avhich textiles were already treated to be “ crease resistant ” but not made water repellant. Burlington Mills agreed to send the goods for plaintiff to appellant Capitol Piece Dye Works, a waterproofer of textiles, to make the goods Avater repellant Avith a 1 £ Zelan ’ ’ process and then ship them to Aronette. The president of Aronette, who was apprehensive of *467purchasing “ crease resistant” goods and then…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Stewart v. . StoneNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
  2. Collins v. . BennettNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
  3. Klar v. H. & M. Parcel Room, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
  4. Wintringham v. . HayesNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
  5. Douglass v. HartSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. United States v. Ruben PereaCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
  2. United States v. Fabric Garment Co., Inc., Mayflower Manufacturing Corp., Joseph Abrams and Murray BermanCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966
  3. Green v. KosloskyAlaska Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Dick v. ReeseIdaho Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Edward Snyder v. Four Winds Sailboat Centre, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983

13 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