Legal Opinion
Lucas v. East Stroudsburg Glass Co.
New York Supreme Court
Decided January 15, 1886Published
Appeal by tbe plaintiff from a judgment, entered on the verdict of a jury, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial made apon the minutes of the justice before whom the action was tried.
1Opinion of the Court
Daniels, J.:
The action was for damages upon a contract for. the sale of glassware. The contract was made between William S. Squier and the defendant. A memorandum of the agreement was subscribed on behalf of the defendant by its treasurer, concededly under its authority. This memorandum is as follows:
William S. Squier.
“ Newark, N. J., August 21, 1879.
“East Stroudsburg Glass Company. '
“ Gents. — I will take as follows during one year from date:
2,000, or more, gross 2 oz. Cone’s inks.................. $1 05
1>000 “ “ -2 oz. Cone’s mucilage.............. 1 06
500 “ “ 8 oz. Cone’s…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Campbell v. . HallNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Martin v. . KunzmullerNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Case v. ReeveNew York Supreme Court · 1817
- Ogden v. PrenticeNew York Supreme Court · 1860
- Lowell v. LaneNew York Supreme Court · 1861
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.