Wilcox v. Lee
The Superior Court of New York City
Motion by defendants for a new trial, on exceptions taken at the trial, and there ordered to be heard at general term in the first instance. The action is for goods sold and delivered in March, 1861, to a firm composed of the defendants and one George A. Dunlap, at the agreed price of $450, on eight months credit.
Read the full summary
Motion by defendants for a new trial, on exceptions taken at the trial, and there ordered to be heard at general term in the first instance. The action is for goods sold and delivered in March, 1861, to a firm composed of the defendants and one George A. Dunlap, at the agreed price of $450, on eight months credit. The defendants, Ripley and Hoyt, set up a former trial in the marine court, in July, 1861, for the same cause ' of action, in a suit by these plaintiffs against these defendants , and said Dunlap, and allege, in their answer, that “judgment therein was rendered in favor of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court, Bosworth, C. J.
The defendants have had the goods for which the verdict was ordered and have not paid for them. The question now is, whether the former trial and judgment therein are a bar to a recovery in this action. It is quite clear that, on the trial in the marine court, as in this, the evidence of the sale of the goods, at the agreed price of $450, on a credit of eight months, was uncontradicted. The evidence on this trial shows that, in the suit in the marine court, Bonta testified that he sold the. goods as agent of the plaintiffs, and so informed the defendants, at the…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Jepson v. International Fraternal AllianceSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1891
- Powers v. McBrideNew York Marine Court · 1882