I.J.S. Fabrics, Inc. v. Dan River, Inc.

New York Court of Appeals

I.J.S. Fabrics, Inc. v. Dan River, Inc.

437 N.E.2d 260, 56 N.Y.2d 755, 452 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3405

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 13, 1982

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 437 N.E.2d 260 (I.J.S. Fabrics, Inc. v. Dan River, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

I.J.S. Fabrics, Inc. v. Dan River, Inc., 437 N.E.2d 260, 56 N.Y.2d 755, 452 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3405 (N.Y. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order should be affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division (81 AD2d 525). We but add that, under the circumstances of this case, once the parties had agreed to the deletion of the warranty clause and the appellant on that basis had accepted respondent’s sales note, whether the respondent still retained and thereafter exercised its right to accept the sales note at its home office would be a question for the arbitrator(s) (cf. Matter of Prime [Jonas], 38 NY2d 570; Matter of Weinrott [Carp], 32 NY2d 190).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order should be affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated in the memorandum at the Appellate Division (81 AD2d 525). We but add that, under the circumstances of this case, once the parties had agreed to the deletion of the warranty clause and the appellant on that basis had accepted respondent’s sales note, whether the respondent still retained and thereafter exercised its right to accept the sales note at its home office would be a question for the arbitrator(s) (cf. Matter of Prime [Jonas], 38 NY2d 570; Matter of Weinrott [Carp], 32 NY2d 190).

Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Meyer concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

437 N.E.2d 260, 56 N.Y.2d 755, 452 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1982 N.Y. LEXIS 3405, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ijs-fabrics-inc-v-dan-river-inc-ny-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack