Waldman v. Greenberg
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Implicit in the jury’s verdict was a finding that the plaintiff had breached the contract as a matter of fact. He was therefore, under settled authority, not entitled to recover any of the money paid. The court properly ruled that plaintiff was not entitled to an inspection of the merchandise prior to the payment of the balance *828due under the contract and in any event that ruling became the law of the ease. On plaintiff’s case, as well as on the whole case, there was no proof of any tender of the balance due under the contract. Plaintiff therefore had breached the contract as a matter of law…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lawrence v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Ziehen v. . SmithNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Beveridge v. West Side Construction Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1909
- Karp v. R. Ritter & Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1920
- Murman v. ManningAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Drucker v. New York UniversityAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1969
- Kaplan v. ScheinerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1956
- Rubinger v. RippeyAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1951
- Simms v. BoveeDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1949
- Knight v. CarterNew York Supreme Court · 1955
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.