George Leuders & Co. v. Fahlberg Saccharine Works

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

George Leuders & Co. v. Fahlberg Saccharine Works

150 N.Y.S. 635

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 24, 1914

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 150 N.Y.S. 635 (George Leuders & Co. v. Fahlberg Saccharine Works) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

George Leuders & Co. v. Fahlberg Saccharine Works, 150 N.Y.S. 635 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

BIJUR, J.

[1, 2] Plaintiff sues for damages caused by the failure of defendant to deliver certain goods. The letters in evidence, which constituted the contract between the parties, do not, as I read them, indicate any place of delivery. Consequently section 124 of the Personal Property Law applies, and makes the place of delivery the seller’s (appellant’s) place of business, and as plaintiff respondent did not call for the goods, there was no breach of contract by defendant. Moreover, without a tender of the purchase price (which was not made) respondent had not placed defendant in default. British. Aluminum Co., Ltd., v. Trefts, 163 App. Div. 184, 148 N. Y. Supp. 144.

Judgment reversed, with costs, 'and complaint dismissed. All concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BIJUR, J.

[1, 2] Plaintiff sues for damages caused by the failure of defendant to deliver certain goods. The letters in evidence, which constituted the contract between the parties, do not, as I read them, indicate any place of delivery. Consequently section 124 of the Personal Property Law applies, and makes the place of delivery the seller’s (appellant’s) place of business, and as plaintiff respondent did not call for the goods, there was no breach of contract by defendant. Moreover, without a tender of the purchase price (which was not made) respondent had not placed defendant in default. British. Aluminum Co., Ltd., v. Trefts, 163 App. Div. 184, 148 N. Y. Supp. 144.

Judgment reversed, with costs, 'and complaint dismissed. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 N.Y.S. 635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/george-leuders-co-v-fahlberg-saccharine-works-nyappterm-1914.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack