Legal Opinion

Silberman v. Fretz

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1896PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Teial by the court without a jury.

1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.

The action is by the plaintiff, as the assignee of Luckmeyer, Shefer & Co., to recover $758.86 for. twenty pieces of Helvetia 'delivered to the defendant November 18, 1886. ■ The ■defense is that the goods, were but a partial delivery under entire and indivisible contracts made on'August' 12 and 18, 1886, for a much larger quantity, and that payment was not to be made until after full performance, which was a condition precedent. .

There is no principle more firmly established in our jurisprudence than, that under an entire contract there is no right of .action, and can be no recovery until…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Smith v. . BradyNew York Court of Appeals · 1858
  2. Tipton v. . FeitnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  3. Ming v. . CorbinNew York Court of Appeals · 1894
  4. Mead v. DegolyerNew York Supreme Court · 1837
  5. Avery v. . WillsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1880

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Fisher v. GoodrichAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1901
  2. Hall v. New Hartford Canning Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1912
  3. Uvalde Asphalt Paving Co. v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1908

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

Powered by the Exa API