Shrimpton Sons (Ltd.) v. Dworsky

City of New York Municipal Court

Shrimpton Sons (Ltd.) v. Dworsky

1 Misc. 507, 20 N.Y.S. 991, 48 N.Y. St. Rep. 937

DecidedOctober 15, 1892

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Misc. 507 (Shrimpton Sons (Ltd.) v. Dworsky) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shrimpton Sons (Ltd.) v. Dworsky, 1 Misc. 507, 20 N.Y.S. 991, 48 N.Y. St. Rep. 937 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1892).

Pincite

Opinion

Ehrlich, Ch. J.

The trial judge intelligently submitted to the jury the question whether the goods delivered had been ordered by the defendant, and whether there was an acceptance of them sufficient to take the case out of the Statute of Frauds, and the jury found on both propositions in favor of [508]*508the plaintiff. The evidence sufficiently sustains the findings, and there being no merit in the exceptions, an affirmance with costs follows as of course.

Van Wyck, J., concurs.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Ehrlich, Ch. J.

The trial judge intelligently submitted to the jury the question whether the goods delivered had been ordered by the defendant, and whether there was an acceptance of them sufficient to take the case out of the Statute of Frauds, and the jury found on both propositions in favor of [508]*508the plaintiff. The evidence sufficiently sustains the findings, and there being no merit in the exceptions, an affirmance with costs follows as of course.

Van Wyck, J., concurs.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Misc. 507, 20 N.Y.S. 991, 48 N.Y. St. Rep. 937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shrimpton-sons-ltd-v-dworsky-nynyccityct-1892.