Strait v. National Harrow Co.
New York Supreme Court
Action by William Strait and others against the National Harrow Company and others. The defendant the National Harrow Company is a corporation.! organized under the laws of the state of New York in September, 1890, for the purpose, as expressed in its certificate, “of conducting and carrying on the manufacture and sale of float spring tooth harrows and other agricultural implements.”
Read the full summary
Action by William Strait and others against the National Harrow Company and others. The defendant the National Harrow Company is a corporation.! organized under the laws of the state of New York in September, 1890, for the purpose, as expressed in its certificate, “of conducting and carrying on the manufacture and sale of float spring tooth harrows and other agricultural implements.” Its capital stock was to be $500,000. On November 10, 1890, these plaintiffs, consisting of a partnership doing business under the name of' the Clipper Chilled Plow Company, at Elmira, together with the defendant…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
I cannot find, as is claimed by the plaintiffs, any stipulation on? the part of the defendant corporation to grant the license mentioned in Exhibit D within three weeks from November 10th. The licenses were to be granted when the sample harrows were all in. It was understood by the parties that the time would be short when these samples would be before the executive committee, and the question of license could be passed upon. I have no doubt that a specified time was there mentioned, but it was not, in my judgment, a part of the contract; and the committee, having met upon the same day that…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Diamond Match Co. v. . RoeberNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Arnot v. . Pittston and Elmira Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Craft v. McConoughyIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
- Hooker & Woodward v. VandewaterNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Stanton v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1848
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- National Harrow Co. v. HenchCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1897
- National Harrow Co. v. QuickU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Indiana · 1895
- National Lead Co. v. S. E. Grote Paint Store Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1899
- Burger v. RoelschNew York Supreme Court · 1894
- National Harrow Co. v. E. Bement & SonsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.