Cooke v. . Millard
New York Court of Appeals
Appear from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Oourt, in the third judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon the report of a referee. (Reported below, 5 Lans., 350.) This action was brought to recover the price of certain lumber, alleged to have been sold and delivered to the defendants.
Read the full summary
Appear from a judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Oourt, in the third judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant, entered upon the report of a referee. (Reported below, 5 Lans., 350.) This action was brought to recover the price of certain lumber, alleged to have been sold and delivered to the defendants. The defence was that the contract was oral, and void within the statute of frauds, and that the lumber was never delivered to or accepted by the defendants. The referee found, in substance, that the plaintiffs were copartners and wholesale lumber merchants, and…
1Opinion of the Court
Dwight, C.
ETo exceptions were taken in this cause, except to the conclusions of law derived by the referee from the facts as found in the report. There are but two questions to be considered: One is, whether the contract is within the statute of frauds; the other is, if it be held that it is within the statute, were the acts, done by the parties, sufficient to comply with its terms, so as to make the contract enforceable in a court of justice ?
In order to determine whether the contract is within the statute, it is important briefly to state the exact acts which the plaintiffs were to perform.
T…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Kimberly v. . PatchinNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Todd v. Dowd's heirsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1858
- Goddard v. BinneyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1874
- Shindler v. . HoustonNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
- Caulkins v. . HellmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- State Board of Administration v. RoquemoreSupreme Court of Alabama · 1928
- Wm. H. Wise & Co. v. Rand McNally & CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1961
- Meincke v. FalkWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
- Pratt v. MillerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Fontaine v. BushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.