Pacun v. Railway Express Agency

3 Misc. 2d 598, 146 N.Y.S.2d 543
New York Supreme Court·Decided October 20, 1955·Published

Opinions

Per Curiam.

There is nothing in the record to establish that the glassware was not already broken at the time it was delivered to defendant for shipment to New York City. “ Substantial justice has not been done between the parties ” (N. Y. City Mun. Ct. Code, § 185).

The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event.

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

Pacun v. Railway Express Agency, 3 Misc. 2d 598, 146 N.Y.S.2d 543 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1955).

3 Misc. 2d 598 (Pacun v. Railway Express Agency) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Levins v. Bucholtz
208 Misc. 597 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1955)