Lamson Consolidated Store Service Co. v. Hartung
New York Court of Common Pleas
Action for balance of purchase price of a chattel. The contract sued on is as follows: “June 24,1891. “To Lamson Consolidated Store Service Co., Boston, Mass.: Please ship two No. 7/25 adding register to No. 775 9th Ave. street, New York, for the use of which the undersigned agree to pay you for two registers so shipped as follows: $75 cash on delivery, and $75 each month, until the sum of $300, for two registers so shipped, has been paid; then said registers to become the…
Read the full summary
Action for balance of purchase price of a chattel. The contract sued on is as follows: “June 24,1891. “To Lamson Consolidated Store Service Co., Boston, Mass.: Please ship two No. 7/25 adding register to No. 775 9th Ave. street, New York, for the use of which the undersigned agree to pay you for two registers so shipped as follows: $75 cash on delivery, and $75 each month, until the sum of $300, for two registers so shipped, has been paid; then said registers to become the property of the undersigned. It is specially agreed that until said sum is fully paid, the undersigned are to have the…
1Opinion of the CourtPryor, J.
Assuming for argument that the evidence suffices to establish a warranty by the plaintiff, and that under the answer the defendant was privileged to prove it, the question is whether the order for the registers constituted-such a contract as precluded paroi evidence of the warranty. The rule is fundamental and familiar that, if a paper appear on its face to be a .complete contract, then, in the absence of fraud, accident, or mistake, paroi evidence is inadmissible to enlarge its terms; the conclusive presumption of law being that such paper embodies the entire agreement of the parties. And…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Seitz v. Brewers' Refrigerating MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Thomas v. . ScuttNew York Court of Appeals · 1891
- M'Crea v. PurmortCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors · 1836
- Chapin v. . DobsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Eighmie v. . TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Amherst Investment Co. v. MeachamWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- Ferree v. EllsworthNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892