Vietor v. Stroock
New York Court of Common Pleas
Motion for leave to appeal- to the court of appeals. For former opinion, and statement of facts, see 5 N. Y. Supp. 659.
1Opinion of the CourtDaly, J.
There seems to be no question to submit to the court of appeals in this case. The decision in Cross v. O' Donnell, 44 N. Y. 661, does not conflict with that in Shindler v. Houston, 1 N. Y. 261, as to what constitutes “ acceptance” of goods under the statute of frauds where the price is over $50, and there is no payment or memorandum in writing. In the latter case there was no acceptance and delivery, as‘required by the statute. In the case before us there was no question as to the delivery, and the facts evidencing acceptance bring it within the decision in Cross v. O'Donnell, first above…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Shindler v. . HoustonNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
- Cross v. . O'DonnellNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Vietor v. StroockNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1889