Legal Opinion
Maley v. Blakeney
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 3, 1945PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSearl, J.
The facts in this case are substantially admitted. The main question involved is whether subdivision 1 of section 44 of the Personal Property Law, Bulk Sales Act, applies. Con*706cretely, does “ The sale * * * of any part or the whole of a stock of merchandise or of fixtures, or merchandise and of fixtures pertaining to the conducting of the business of the seller ” (italics supplied) contemplate and include the sale in bulk of four trucks, and three trailers, constituting in effect the total assets and property of defendant Blakeney?
The conceded facts are: That Blakeney was a coal dealer. The…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Matter of City of New York (Allen St.)New York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Gallus v. ElmerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1906
- Fischer v. Rio Tire Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1933
- Everett Produce Co. v. Smith Bros.Washington Supreme Court · 1905
- Bowen v. QuigleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1911
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Stumpp & Walter Co. v. Napanoch Country Club, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1950
- Cosmopolitan Equities, Inc. v. Pacific Seafarers, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1963