Legal Opinion

Phœnix Hermetic Co. v. Filtrine Manufacturing Co.

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

Decided November 27, 1914PublishedCited by 6 opinions

Appeal by the plaintiff, The Phoenix Hermetic Company, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendants, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 2d day of February, 1914, upon the verdict of a jury, and also from an order entered in said clerk’s office on the 13th day of February, 1914, denying the plaintiff’s motion for a new trial made upon the minutes.

1Per curiam

Mr. George Kneuper, as the inventor, and the Filtrine Manufacturing Company, of which Mr. Kneuper was president, manufactured filters in Brooklyn. On December 27, 1910, they entered into an agreement with the Phoenix Cap Company for an exclusive sale of their filters of the standard sizes (but excepting those which required special installation), at a stated schedule of prices. The manufacturers agreed to fill all orders of the Phoenix Cap Company, also to be ready to make deliveries at certain weekly rates; for example, 1,000 weekly was to be the rate of delivery for the “ Mountain Spring ”…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Genet v. President of the Delaware & Hudson Canal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1893
  2. Scrantom v. BoothNew York Supreme Court · 1859
  3. Creamer v. Metropolitan Securities Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Wood v. . Duff-GordonNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
  2. In re the People of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Southland Corp. v. MirDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 1990
  4. Kipsborough Realty Corp. v. GoldbetterCivil Court of the City of New York · 1975
  5. Thomas A. Edison, Inc. v. Blackman Distributing Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933

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

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

Powered by the Exa API