Live Poultry Auction Co. v. Kastein

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Live Poultry Auction Co. v. Kastein

155 N.Y.S. 353

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 3, 1915

StatusPublished

This text of 155 N.Y.S. 353 (Live Poultry Auction Co. v. Kastein) 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

Live Poultry Auction Co. v. Kastein, 155 N.Y.S. 353 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

PAGE, J.

The action was to recover the purchase price of goods sold and delivered. The sale of the goods and their delivery at the place where defendant had carried on business for a number of years was admitted. It does not appear from the evidence that he was not conducting business at that place during all the period of the transactions in suit.

The sole question litigated was that of liability. It was proved that the defendant’s son Eli purchased the goods at auction, that they were billed to the defendant, and paid by checks signed in the defendant’s name by Eli, who was duly authorized. Although considerable competent evidence was erroneously excluded at the trial, sufficient evidence of the course of dealing and ratification of Eli’s purchase from the plaintiff to establish prima facie Eli’s agency, and the consequent liability of the defendant to. the plaintiff, was adduced.

The judgment will be reversed, and a new trial granted, with $30 costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

PAGE, J.

The action was to recover the purchase price of goods sold and delivered. The sale of the goods and their delivery at the place where defendant had carried on business for a number of years was admitted. It does not appear from the evidence that he was not conducting business at that place during all the period of the transactions in suit.

The sole question litigated was that of liability. It was proved that the defendant’s son Eli purchased the goods at auction, that they were billed to the defendant, and paid by checks signed in the defendant’s name by Eli, who was duly authorized. Although considerable competent evidence was erroneously excluded at the trial, sufficient evidence of the course of dealing and ratification of Eli’s purchase from the plaintiff to establish prima facie Eli’s agency, and the consequent liability of the defendant to. the plaintiff, was adduced.

The judgment will be reversed, and a new trial granted, with $30 costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 N.Y.S. 353, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/live-poultry-auction-co-v-kastein-nyappterm-1915.