Joy v. Schloss
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal from a judgment of the General Term of the City Court of New York reversing a judgment of that court entered on the verdict of a jury and ordering a new trial. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Hoesen, J.
The learned justice who wrote the *534opinion of the General Term of the City Court of New York, said very correctly that, if as matter of fact," the plaintiffs had failed to show that the goods were to be manufactured by them, the statute would clearly apply to the contract, and the mistake that the General Term made was in assuming that the plaintiffs themselves were bound by the contract to manufacture the goods. There is not only no evidence to support such a finding, but there is conclusive evidence to the contrary.
The plaintiffs were agents for several mills that manufactured woolen and…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hoe v. . SanbornNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
- Parsons v. . LoucksNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
3Cited by2 opinions
- Evarts v. ThornCity of New York Municipal Court · 1887
- Rutty v. Consolidated Fruit-Jar Co.New York Supreme Court · 1890