Legal Opinion

Rogers v. Beckrich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 1, 1899PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal by the plaintiffs, Edward J. Rogers and another, from an -order of the . Supreme Court, made at the Erie Trial Term and ■entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Erie on the 21st day of January, 1898, denying their motion for a new trial made upon the minutes, after a verdict in favor of the defendant rendered at the Erie Trial Term.

1Opinion of the Court

Adams, J.:

The plaintiffs, who were manufacturers of and dealers in bicycles', bring this action to recover damages which it is alleged they have sustained in consequence of a breach of warranty by the defendant upon an executory contract for the sale of 500 crank hangers.

A- crank hanger is an appliance pertaining to a bicycle, and is •composed of a sleeve, cones, cups, cranks, sprocket, etc.

’ The defendant is a "manufacturer of these articles, and the sale in question was made by his agent, one Charles H. Walters. It is undisputed that Walters, in order to induce the plaintiffs to purchase…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hoe v. . SanbornNew York Court of Appeals · 1860
  2. Reynolds v. Mayor, Lane & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1899

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Acme Glass Co. v. Woods-Lloyd Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1918
  2. B. P. Ducas Co. v. American Silk Dyeing & Finishing Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1905

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API