Consolidated Fruit Jar Co. v. Wisner
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
ReAbgument of an appeal by the plaintiff, The Consolidated Fruit Jar Company, frojn a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the" office of the clerk of the county of Rew York on the 12th day of June, 1901, upon the report of a referee-.
1Opinion of the Court
O’Bbien, P. J.:
This action is now before the court pursuant to its order directing a reargument of the appeal, “ the reargument to be limited to the question of the right of defendant to recover the dividends declared January 18, 1899, and January 18, 1900.” •
The facts have been fully detailed in our former opinion (Consolidated Fruit Jar Co. v. Wisner, 103 App. Div. 453), and we then stated that, while the evidence supported the finding of the referee that the defendant had paid to the plaintiff more than other customers paid for like goods, and more than he could fairly' have been required…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Mott v. . OppenheimerNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
- Goldthwait v. DayMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1889
- McGregor v. McGregorSupreme Court of Iowa · 1866
- Consolidated Fruit Jar Co. v. WisnerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1905
- Scott v. PinkertonNew York Court of Chancery · 1837
3Cited by8 opinions
- Epstein v. . GluckinNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Township of Normania v. County of Yellow MedicineSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1939
- Smith v. First National BankAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912
- Denny, Rec. v. ScoonoverIndiana Court of Appeals · 1926
- Hochen v. RubinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.