Legal Opinion

Mommer v. Friedlander

City of New York Municipal Court

Decided February 15, 1886Published

Motion for new trial on the minutes.

1Opinion of the Court

McAdam, Ch. J.

The goods sold exceeded $50 in value. Mo part of the purchase price was paid at the time, and there was no note or memorandum of the contract signed by the parties to be charged, and the complaint was dismissed because there was no acceptance of the goods by the defendant so as to charge him under the statute of frauds. The plaintiffs move for a new trial, and the question presented is whether there was due acceptance of the goods by the defendant sufficient to satisfy the statute. The law on the subject will be considered first; the facts next.

In order to satisfy the statute,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Shindler v. . HoustonNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
  2. Caulkins v. . HellmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
  3. Allard v. . GreasertNew York Court of Appeals · 1874
  4. Aldrich v. PyattNew York Supreme Court · 1872
  5. Duplex Safety Boiler Co. v. McGinnessNew York Marine Court · 1882

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

Powered by the Exa API