Clark v. . Dickinson
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, entered upon a verdict, and affirming an order denying a motion for a new. trial. This action was brought to recover damages for an alleged breach of a contract for the purchase and sale of a quantity of oil. The facts appear sufficiently in the opinion.
Read the full summary
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the first judicial department, affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, entered upon a verdict, and affirming an order denying a motion for a new. trial. This action was brought to recover damages for an alleged breach of a contract for the purchase and sale of a quantity of oil. The facts appear sufficiently in the opinion. Defendant was not substituted in the place of J. L. Pierce & Co. as purchaser under the contracts in suit. (Tatlock v. Harris, 3 T. R, 174; Wilson v. Coupland, 5 B. & Ald., 228; Heaton v. Angier, 7 N.…
1Per curiam
The plaintiffs’ demand is founded upon two contracts in writing, commonly called bought and sold notes, entered into between them and the firm of J. L. Pierce & Co., on the 28th of February, 1867, by which said J. L. Pierce & Co. bought from the plaintiffs 1,000 barrels of oil, which were deliverable at the plaintiffs’ option during the remainder of the year 1867, for which the vendors agreed to pay thirty-six cents per gallon. In the month of October, 1867, said J. L. Pierce & Co., for value, sold and assigned said contracts to the defendant, and, for the purpose of transferring them,…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Holmes v. WeedNew York Supreme Court · 1854