Legal Opinion
Buyer v. Mercury Technical Cloth & Felt Corp.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 25, 1950PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFroessel, J.
In an action founded on a contract for the sale of a quantity of bleached white lawn, plaintiffs-buyers allege defendant-seller’s breach in failing to deliver in accordance with the terms of the contract. Defendant concedes nondelivery, but urges that the trial court erred in charging the jury that the contract sued on was not rescinded or cancelled, and only the time for delivery was extended. We hold that the court’s charge in this respect was correct, for defendant’s letter to plaintiff dated August 16, 1946, stating: “ Delivery of the goods is extended to the end of September 1946 ”,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Todd v. . GambleNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Orester v. Dayton Rubber Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1920
- Saxe v. . Penokee Lumber Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Murphy v. LifschitzNew York Supreme Court · 1944
- Murphy v. LifschitzNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hughes Tool Co. v. United Artists Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
- Harbor Hill Lithographing Corp. v. Dittler Bros.New York Supreme Court · 1973
- Hugo v. Loewi, Inc. v. GeschwillCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1951
- Agress Nut & Seed Co. v. SargissAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1953
- Hoffman v. Kaufman Carpet-Jamaica, Inc.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1958