Hano v. Simons

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Hano v. Simons

92 N.Y.S. 337

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 1, 1905

StatusPublished

This text of 92 N.Y.S. 337 (Hano v. Simons) 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

Hano v. Simons, 92 N.Y.S. 337 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

SCOTT, J.

I see no warranty which survived acceptance and payment. If the approval of ■ the fire underwriters was necessary before plaintiffs could have been called upon to accept the doors, they waived that condition by accepting and paying before such approval had been had. There was no fraud or concealment. The plaintiffs saw the doors, and had notice and knowledge of their alleged defects. If plaintiffs rely upon defendants’ promise, subsequent to or contemporaneously with payment, to make the doors right, they have not proved damages, which would be the difference in value between the doors as they are and as they would be if made right.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellants to abide the event.

DAVIS, J., concurs; MacLEAN, J., taking no part.

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

SCOTT, J.

I see no warranty which survived acceptance and payment. If the approval of ■ the fire underwriters was necessary before plaintiffs could have been called upon to accept the doors, they waived that condition by accepting and paying before such approval had been had. There was no fraud or concealment. The plaintiffs saw the doors, and had notice and knowledge of their alleged defects. If plaintiffs rely upon defendants’ promise, subsequent to or contemporaneously with payment, to make the doors right, they have not proved damages, which would be the difference in value between the doors as they are and as they would be if made right.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellants to abide the event.

DAVIS, J., concurs; MacLEAN, J., taking no part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

92 N.Y.S. 337, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hano-v-simons-nyappterm-1905.