Rochester Lantern Co. v. Stiles & Parker Press Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made LTovember 20,1891, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. This action was brought to recover damages for alleged breach of contract. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The contract between Kelly and the defendant was assignable.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the fifth judicial department, entered upon an order made LTovember 20,1891, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon the report of a referee. This action was brought to recover damages for alleged breach of contract. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. The contract between Kelly and the defendant was assignable. (Bishop on Cont. § 603 ; Devlin v. City of New York, 63 N. Y. 8.) The defendant never was under the slightest obligation to make the dies in question, in the manner specified,…
1Opinion of the Court
Eaul, Ch. J.
The defendant brings this appeal without having made a case containing any of the evidence and relies solely upon exceptions contained in or annexed to the judgment-roll as provided in sections 994 and 997 of the Code. "We do not know what the evidence upon the trial was, except as we are informed by the findings of facts.
The defendant does not complain of the findings of facts made by the referee, but it finds fault with his rulings upon matters of law, and the sole question before us is whether the rulings are justified by the facts found. In other words do the facts found…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Griffin v. . ColverNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
- Devlin v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Murray v. . MarshallNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Stoddard v. . WhitingNew York Court of Appeals · 1871
- Chubbuck v. . VernamNew York Court of Appeals · 1870
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by62 opinions
- New York Bank Note Co. v. Hamilton Bank Note Engraving & Printing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1905
- Procter & Gamble Distributing Co. v. Lawrence American Field Warehousing Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1965
- Witherbee v. . MeyerNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- R. R. v. . R. R.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
- Atlantic & North Carolina Railroad v. Atlantic & North Carolina Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1908
57 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.