Legal Opinion

Curtis v. Saddlery Hardware Manufacturing Co.

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided February 28, 1894PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from first district court. Action by George W. Curtis and others against the Saddlery Hardware Manufacturing Company to recover for goods sold and delivered. From a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, rendered by a justice without a jury, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

1Opinion of the CourtGiegerich, J.

The defendant ordered from the plaintiffs certain lap robes, to be in accordance with samples furnished. The goods were made and delivered to the defendant, and were shortly afterwards returned, the ground assigned being that they did not correspond to the samples. These robes, as ordered, were of two varieties, viz. “50 Ho. H lap robes, and 50 Ho. O lap robes.” Plaintiffs admitted, at the time of the return of the goods, that the H robes did not answer to the samples sent, and accepted them, crediting defendant with the agreed price therefor upon the bill which they then sent for the full…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lynes v. HickeyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
  2. Schwartz v. WechlerNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892
  3. Carroll v. O'SheaNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
  4. Siegman v. KeelerNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
  5. Gaylord v. GallagherNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1892

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Kafka v. LevensohnAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1896
  2. Sulyewski v. WindholzNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1894

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API