Leibowitz v. Foster & Stewart Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Leibowitz v. Foster & Stewart Co.

202 A.D. 813

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 15, 1922

StatusPublished

This text of 202 A.D. 813 (Leibowitz v. Foster & Stewart Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Leibowitz v. Foster & Stewart Co., 202 A.D. 813 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

Order setting aside the dismissal of the complaint and of the counterclaim, and granting a new trial, affirmed, without costs, The majority of the court is of opinion that as a matter of law the time for the delivery of the merchandise was waived by plaintiffs, the purchasers, and hence they have no cause of action unless they notified defendant requiring delivery within a reasonable time before they commenced their action. (Taylor v. Goelet, 208 N. Y. 253; Schulder v. Ladew Co., Inc., 178 App. Div. 458; Ullman Co. v. Mott Iron Works, 187 id. 699.) Blackmar, P. J., Kelby and Young, JJ., concur; Kelly and Manning, JJ., while concurring to affirm the order, are of opinion that the whole question as to a breach of the contract, waiver of the provisions, and the obligations of both parties in respect thereto, should be determined by a jury in accordance with facts and circumstances as disclosed by the evidence upon the new trial. (See Pers. Prop. Law, §§ 126, 146.)

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

Order setting aside the dismissal of the complaint and of the counterclaim, and granting a new trial, affirmed, without costs, The majority of the court is of opinion that as a matter of law the time for the delivery of the merchandise was waived by plaintiffs, the purchasers, and hence they have no cause of action unless they notified defendant requiring delivery within a reasonable time before they commenced their action. (Taylor v. Goelet, 208 N. Y. 253; Schulder v. Ladew Co., Inc., 178 App. Div. 458; Ullman Co. v. Mott Iron Works, 187 id. 699.) Blackmar, P. J., Kelby and Young, JJ., concur; Kelly and Manning, JJ., while concurring to affirm the order, are of opinion that the whole question as to a breach of the contract, waiver of the provisions, and the obligations of both parties in respect thereto, should be determined by a jury in accordance with facts and circumstances as disclosed by the evidence upon the new trial. (See Pers. Prop. Law, §§ 126, 146.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

202 A.D. 813, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leibowitz-v-foster-stewart-co-nyappdiv-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack