Norton v. . Dreyfuss
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of Hew York, entered upon an order made March 30, 1885, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict directed by the court and affirming an order denying a motion for a new trial. (Reported below 19 J. & S. 491.) The nature of the action and the material facts are stated in the opinion.
1Per curiam
The plaintiff brings this action to recover the contract price for manufacturing and delivering certain dies and frames for the defendant. The answer was that the goods were not such as the contract required, and also set up a counter-claim.
The evidence given upon the trial differed very much as to the terms and conditions of the contract, the time for its per formance, the quality of the articles manufactured, their fitness for the purposes intended, and as to whether the goods delivered, corresponded with the articles ordered by the defendant. It was conceded that the plaintiff manufactured…
2Cited by34 opinions
- Oakland Sugar Mill Co. v. Fred W. Wolf Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1902
- Studer v. . BleisteinNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Florida Athletic Club v. Hope Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1898
- White v. . SchweitzerNew York Court of Appeals · 1917
- Hurley-Mason Co. v. Stebbins, Walker & SpinningWashington Supreme Court · 1914
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.