Kent v. De Coppet
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Appeal "by the defendants, Edward J. De Ooppet and others, doing business under the firm name and style of De Ooppet & Doremus, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the plaintiff, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of New York on the 28th day of June, 1911, upon the decision of the court rendered after a trial at the New York Trial Term, a jury having been waived.
1Opinion of the Court
McLaughlin, J.:
The defendants are stockbrokers doing business upon the New York Stock Exchange and this action is brought for the purpose of enforcing a contract for the sale to them of certain stock made upon the exchange in the usual way by other brokers who were acting for the plaintiff’s assignor.
The appeal presents only a question of law, there being no contest between the parties-as to the facts. On January 19,, 1910, one James W. Escher, plaintiff’s assignor, was the owner of twenty-five shares of the common stock of the Columbus and Hocking Coal and Iron Company, a certificate for…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Richardson v. ShawSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Arkansas Valley Smelting Co. v. Belden Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Bibb v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Skiff v. StoddardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1893
- Le Marchant v. . MooreNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Crusius v. LouchheimNew York Supreme Court · 1928
- Mandeville v. PoolerSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1938
- In re Chinese Merchants Bank, Ltd.New York Supreme Court · 1934
- Shaw v. McQueeneyAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1914
- Clancy v. TansleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1955
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.