Legal Opinion
Keating v. Conviser
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 7, 1926PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCarswell, J.
The letter said to contain the claimed libel is as follows:
íí(~, , tt Conviser s Uneeda,
“ 1061 Broadway, Brooklyn, N. Y.
“ Telephone Jefferson 6200 March 26, 1924. No. 28817. “IT. S. Lines,
“45 Broadway, N. Y. C.:
“ Gentlemen.— Permit us to direct your attention to a matter of importance. Miss Alice Keating of your employ purchased from *532us some time ago clothing amounting to $79.50. Although agreeing to pay us $2.50 per week, to date we have received no payment on the balance of $10.00 since August 11, 1923. Frankly speaking, the only basis upon which we extended credit to her was the fact that…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sydney v. MacFadden Newspaper Publishing Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1926
- Fry v. McCord Bros.Tennessee Supreme Court · 1895
- Stannard v. Wilcox & Gibbs Sewing MacHine Co.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 1912
- Harrison v. BurgerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1925
- Thorner v. SamuelsNew York Supreme Court · 1923
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- M. Rosenberg & Sons, Inc. v. CraftSupreme Court of Virginia · 1944
- Murray v. CassirerNew York Supreme Court · 1962