Goodman Bros. v. Ashton
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
McAvoy, J.:
A motion was made in this case under rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice to dismiss the amended complaint because it did not contain facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. The Special Term denied the motion.
The amended complaint upon which plaintiff must now rest shows that in April, 1923, plaintiff entered into a contract of sale with defendant as agent for Rayner, Heusser & Co., of Shanghai, China, under which the latter sold to plaintiff and plaintiff bought from them certain weasel skins upon the terms and prices which are set forth in an exhibit attached to the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Lamb v. S. Cheney & SonNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
- De Jong v. B. G. Behrman Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911
3Cited by8 opinions
- Benton v. Kennedy-Van Saun Mfg. & Eng. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956
- Cooke v. DodgeNew York Supreme Court · 1937
- Emery v. a & B Commercial Finishing CompanySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1957
- Jennings v. Burlington Industries, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1963
- Roulette Records, Inc. v. Princess Production Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.