Pepper v. Grossman

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Pepper v. Grossman

155 A. 16, 9 N.J. Misc. 608, 1931 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 299

DecidedMay 25, 1931

StatusPublished

This text of 155 A. 16 (Pepper v. Grossman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Pepper v. Grossman, 155 A. 16, 9 N.J. Misc. 608, 1931 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 299 (N.J. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

Pbk Curiam.

Defendant sold plaintiff an awning for $27.50. On the paper called “contract” was the following: “All orders subject to approval of office. Awnings remain our property until paid in full. A deposit required on all work. Our terms are strictly cash—when awnings are completed and put up pay man who delivers them.” The awning was not fully paid for. In the absence of the plaintiff, defendant sent and removed the awning. Plaintiff sued, on a trespass, for alleged damages, including damage to furs from being exposed to the sun. Verdict went for the plaintiff in the amount of $230, and defendants appeal. A reading of the evidence convinces us that it does not sustain the verdict.

Judgment below is reversed, with costs.

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

Pbk Curiam.

Defendant sold plaintiff an awning for $27.50. On the paper called “contract” was the following: “All orders subject to approval of office. Awnings remain our property until paid in full. A deposit required on all work. Our terms are strictly cash—when awnings are completed and put up pay man who delivers them.” The awning was not fully paid for. In the absence of the plaintiff, defendant sent and removed the awning. Plaintiff sued, on a trespass, for alleged damages, including damage to furs from being exposed to the sun. Verdict went for the plaintiff in the amount of $230, and defendants appeal. A reading of the evidence convinces us that it does not sustain the verdict.

Judgment below is reversed, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

155 A. 16, 9 N.J. Misc. 608, 1931 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pepper-v-grossman-nj-1931.