Schultz v. Bradley
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal by the defendants from a judgment entered on the verdict of a jury at trial term. The action was brought to recover damages for a refusal to take and pay for certain goods. The facts are as follows : In December, 1864, an agreement was entered into by the parties to this action, for the sale and purchase of 10,000 sides of oak wax leather, memoranda of which agreement were signed and exchanged.
Read the full summary
Appeal by the defendants from a judgment entered on the verdict of a jury at trial term. The action was brought to recover damages for a refusal to take and pay for certain goods. The facts are as follows : In December, 1864, an agreement was entered into by the parties to this action, for the sale and purchase of 10,000 sides of oak wax leather, memoranda of which agreement were signed and exchanged. By the terms of sale, 3,000 sides were to be delivered at once, and paid for in thirty days, the residue to be ■delivered as fast as finished, from 100 to 150 sides daily, commencing January…
1Dissent
Robinson, J. [dissenting].
Conceding that the agreement relating to the 5,635 sides ofleather in question was not obnoxious to the provisions of the statute of frauds, the defendant was not liable for the damages which have been assessed against him for the assumed difference between the price he agreed to pay and that realized by the subsequent resale to Johnson and *35Thompson, or upon any evidence establishing any basis for a recovery.
It clearly appears he rejected the leather as not of the quality called for by the contract, that with notice of such rejection, and in compliance with his…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Pollen v. . Le RoyNew York Court of Appeals · 1864
- Wright v. . WeeksNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Bement v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1836
- Dey v. DoxNew York Supreme Court · 1832
- McEachron v. RandlesNew York Supreme Court · 1861
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.