Legal Opinion

Mead v. Pope

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided February 5, 1894PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from first district court. Action by James Mead against William B. Pope for goods, sold and delivered. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, rendered by a justice without a jury, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

1Opinion of the CourtGiegerich, J.

The appellant’s sole exception, as appears from the record, was taken to the denial of his motion to dismiss the com*339plaint, made upon the close of the plaintiff’s case. Evidence was adduced, upon the part of the plaintiff, showing that the coke in question had been continuously delivered at the premises owned since July, 1891, by the defendant;, that bills for the same, made out in defendant’s name, were paid, partly in cash, and partly by defendant’s check, during the period from July 11, 1891, to March 10, 1892; and that these bills were founded upon receipts for the material, signed with…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lynes v. HickeyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Clark v. SmithNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894
  2. Smidt v. DessarNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API