Legal Opinion

Lieberman v. . Templar Motor Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided May 29, 1923PublishedCited by 36 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCardozo, J.

The Hudson Auto Body Corporation, plaintiff’s assignor, made a contract on August 21, 1919, with the defendant, the Templar Motor Company, to manufacture automobile bodies for use in the defendant’s cars. The contract is in writing. It calls for 2,500 bodies to be made according to a special design. Deliveries are to commence on December 1, and to continue at the rate of ten bodies a day. The price is to be $130 per body, F. O. B. freight cars, New York city. If railroad facilities are lacking, the bodies may be stored at the defendant’s expense. The manufacturer is not to be held responsible…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. United States v. BehanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. United States v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1915
  3. Imperator Realty Co. v. . TullNew York Court of Appeals · 1920
  4. Callanan v. . K., A.C. L.C.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1910
  5. Strasbourger v. . LeerburgerNew York Court of Appeals · 1922

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

3Cited by36 opinions

  1. Campagnola v. MulhollandNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
  2. Perfecting Service Co. v. Product Development & Sales Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1963
  3. Magnet Resources v. Summit MRI, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1998
  4. Mutual Ben. Health & Accident Ass'n v. CohenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1952
  5. Rice v. Provident Life & Accident InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1937

31 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