Rogerson Fruit & Cold Storage Co. v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rogerson Fruit & Cold Storage Co. v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad

84 N.Y.S. 1143

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

DecidedOctober 27, 1903

StatusPublished

This text of 84 N.Y.S. 1143 (Rogerson Fruit & Cold Storage Co. v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad) 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

Rogerson Fruit & Cold Storage Co. v. New York Central & Hudson River Railroad, 84 N.Y.S. 1143 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted, upon payment by the defendant of all costs, except those upon this appeal, subsequent to the service of the original answer, with leave to the plaintiff to discontinue the action without costs. In case of such discontinuance, the plaintiff to recover costs as stated. Held that, the laches being sufficiently excused and it appearing that the plaintiff will not lose any right existing at the time of the commencement of the action by the proposed amendment, it must be regarded as in furtherance of justice to permit the defendant to set up the terms of the contract under which the goods were shipped.

STOVER, J., not voting.

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

PER CURIAM.

Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion granted, upon payment by the defendant of all costs, except those upon this appeal, subsequent to the service of the original answer, with leave to the plaintiff to discontinue the action without costs. In case of such discontinuance, the plaintiff to recover costs as stated. Held that, the laches being sufficiently excused and it appearing that the plaintiff will not lose any right existing at the time of the commencement of the action by the proposed amendment, it must be regarded as in furtherance of justice to permit the defendant to set up the terms of the contract under which the goods were shipped.

STOVER, J., not voting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.Y.S. 1143, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogerson-fruit-cold-storage-co-v-new-york-central-hudson-river-nyappdiv-1903.