Wm. H. Davidow Sons Co. v. Firth & Foster Co.

199 A.D. 102, 191 N.Y.S. 248, 1921 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6612

This text of 199 A.D. 102 (Wm. H. Davidow Sons Co. v. Firth & Foster Co.) 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
Wm. H. Davidow Sons Co. v. Firth & Foster Co., 199 A.D. 102, 191 N.Y.S. 248, 1921 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6612 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1921).

Opinion

Dowling, J.:

The record in this case is practically the same as that in Sullivan v. Firth & Foster Co. (199 App. Div. 99), decided herewith, save that in the present case plaintiff is a domestic corporation and the goods were shipped from New York to Philadelphia to be dyed. Plaintiff has submitted in addition an affidavit by Archibald Davidow, which is largely argumentative in its nature, and contains no proof of any facts differentiating the present from the Sullivan case.

The order appealed from will, therefore, be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

Clarke, P. J., Laughlin, Page and Merrell, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with ten dollars costs.

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

Related

Sullivan v. Firth & Foster Co.
199 A.D. 99 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
199 A.D. 102, 191 N.Y.S. 248, 1921 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wm-h-davidow-sons-co-v-firth-foster-co-nyappdiv-1921.