Eppens, Smith Wiemann Co. v. . Littlejohn
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 26, 1898, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial. The action was brought to recover damages for defendants’ refusal to accept and pay for a certain lot of coffee bought and sold by the following contract : “ Standard Contract. “New York, Feby. 8, 1893. “ Expected mark.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 26, 1898, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a verdict, and an order denying a motion for a new trial. The action was brought to recover damages for defendants’ refusal to accept and pay for a certain lot of coffee bought and sold by the following contract : “ Standard Contract. “New York, Feby. 8, 1893. “ Expected mark. “ 1E. S. & W.’ “{M ’ “ Sold for account of 11. Eppens, Smith and Wiemann Co., to Hess. Littlejohn & Parsons. The sound and made sound…
1Opinion of the CourtLandon, J.
The parties knew when they made their contract that, owing to the few sailing vessels leaving Padang, in Sumatra, for Hew York, a delay of some weeks or months might occur in making the shipment of coffee. As they fixed no tim$ for the shipment in the contract itself, the law required the shipment to be made within a reasonable time, and the burden was upon the plaintiff to show compliance in this particular. (Pope v. Terre Haute Car & Mfg. Co., 107 N. Y. 61.) What constitutes a reasonable time usually depends upon the circumstances of the particular case, such, at least, as the parties may…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Beebe v. JohnsonNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Oregon Steamship Co. v. . OtisNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Mayer v. . DeanNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Pope v. Terre Haute Car & Manufacturing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Austin v. . HollandNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Colt v. . KimballSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1925
- John F. Trainor Co. v. G. Amsinck & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
- Frankfurt-Barnett Co. v. William Prym Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1916
- Van Iderstine Co., Inc. v. Barnet L. Co., Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Companhia De Navegacao Lloyd Brasileiro v. C. G. Blake Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.