Legal Opinion
Case v. Hardenbrook
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 28, 1933PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLazansky, P. J.
Case sold Hardenbrook a rug for $13,000. Claiming that Case had warranted the rug in certain respects, of *170which the most important was that it was an antique Lavre Kerman, and that the warranties had been breached, Hardenbrook brought an action against Case, alleging the warranties, their breach and other matters sufficient to state a cause of action, demanding damages in the sum of $32,500. The answer, to the extent necessary for present consideration, was a general denial. There was a jury trial and a verdict was rendered for Case. The only issues submitted to the jury were: Did Case…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Baltimore Steamship Co. v. PhillipsSupreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Schuylkill Fuel Corp. v. B. & C. Nieberg Realty Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1929
- Shippen v. BowenSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Holman v. Dord & RoweNew York Supreme Court · 1851
- Gutchess v. WhitingNew York Supreme Court · 1866
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- McManus v. BendlageCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Hoard v. U. S. Paint, Lacquer & Chemical Co.New York Supreme Court · 1964
- In re the Estate of AltmannNew York Surrogate's Court · 1933
- Chesapeake Industries, Inc. v. William McKinley WetzelCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1959
- Bruning v. BruningAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952