Havemeyer v. Cunningham
New York Supreme Court
ACTION to recover damages for not delivering a lot of sugar, wMch the defendants had agreed to sell to the plaintiffs. The contract was as follows : "ew York, May 1, 1856. Sold for account of Messrs. Cunningham Brothers, to Messrs.
Read the full summary
ACTION to recover damages for not delivering a lot of sugar, wMch the defendants had agreed to sell to the plaintiffs. The contract was as follows : "ew York, May 1, 1856. Sold for account of Messrs. Cunningham Brothers, to Messrs. Havemeyer & Moller, the invoice of sugar for their account, per Anna Kimball, 700 tons, more or less, at 6|-cents, less 4 per cent off for cash; to arrive on or before 1st August, to be of current quality, clayed, to be delivered foot of Charlton st., New York. Hallett, Dow & Young, Brokers, 89 Wall street.” On the 1st August, the sugar not having arrived in New…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Ingraham, J.
The contract in this case is an executory contract for the sale of an invoice of sugar per Anna Kimball, 700 tons, more or less, to arrive on or before 1st of August, and sugar to be of current quality, clayed.
This was made on the 1st of May, 1856. The sugar had then been shipped on board the vessel and was on its way to this country, but did not arrive until after the 1st of August. Part of it was damaged on the voyage, and the residue the defendants refused to deliver, upon the ground that the contract was at an end, because the vessel did not arrive within the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Russell v. NicollNew York Supreme Court · 1829
3Cited by12 opinions
- Neal v. JeffersonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1912
- Lawrence v. PorterCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1894
- Hibbard v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1873
- Canadian Industrial Alcohol Co. v. Dunbar Molasses Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1932
- Christman v. Maristella Compania NavieraDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1971
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.