Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Coleman v. Simpson, Hendee & Co.

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

Decided May 15, 1914Published

Appeal by the plaintiff, John D. Coleman, from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of the defendant, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Dutchess on the 11th day of December, 1913, upon a dismissal of the complaint by direction of the court at the close of plaintiff’s case.

1ConcurrenceCarr, J.

On the former trial of this action the question of an implied warranty was submitted to the jury and that of an express warranty was withdrawn from them by the trial court. It was held on appeal that the proofs did not justify the finding of an implied warranty, and the judgment was reversed. (158 App. Div. 461.) On that trial the only evidence as to the trade meaning of the words “seed oats” was given by the defense, and remained uncontradicted. We were of opinion that under the proofs so given the oats delivered by the defendant answered to the description of “seed oats.” On the new trial,…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Coleman v. Simpson, Hendee & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API