Legal Opinion

New Hartford Canning Co. v. Bulifant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided July 1, 1902PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal by the defendants, Isaac Bulifant and another, from an order of the Supreme Court, made at the Oneida Special Term and entered in the ofiice of the clerk of the county of Oneida on the 3d day of November, 1902, modifying a preliminary injunction theretofore granted in the action “ so as to restrain the defendants from selling or delivering 2,588 cases of corn as therein provided,” and continuing such injunction as thus modified.

1Opinion of the Court

Spring, J.:

On the 12th day of September, 1900, the defendants agreed to sell and deliver to the plaintiff 5,000 cases of canned corn at seventy cents per dozen cans, subject to seventy-five per cent delivery in case the pack was short. On September nineteenth the defendants wrote the plaintiff that they would be unable to deliver more than seventy-five per cent of the corn, and that portion they desired to deliver promptly. The plaintiff, who contended that there had been a full pack, replied by letter dated September twenty-third, stating: “We decline to have our contract prorated…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. McHenry v. . JewettNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
  2. Johnson v. . BrooksNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
  3. Lighthouse v. Third National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1900
  4. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. President, Managers, of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1865

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Saslow v. NovickNew York Supreme Court · 1959
  2. Samuel Cupples Envelope Co. v. LacknerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
  3. Samuel Cupples Envelope Co. v. LacknerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1904
  4. Washington Cranberry Growers Ass'n v. MooreWashington Supreme Court · 1921

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

Powered by the Exa API