Legal Opinion · Dissent

Yellow Manufacturing Credit Corp. v. Horowitz

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided February 14, 1938Published

1DissentHammer, J.

I dissent and vote for affirmance. The evidence warranted the court in accepting the version of plaintiff, a conditional vendor. The illegal seizure in New Jersey did not give defendants’ possession which can be made the basis of a lien. (Owl Wet Wash Laundry Co., Inc., v. Karish, 188 N. Y. Supp. 782; Smith v. Pierce Arrow Sales Corp., 224 App. Div. 769; Sterling Motor Truck Co. v. Lavan, 260 N. Y. 43.)

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Smith v. Pierce-Arrow Sales Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928
  2. Sterling Motor Truck Co. of N. Y., Inc. v. LavanNew York Court of Appeals · 1932