Frackville Manufacturing Co. v. Barish — 237 N.Y. 582

Majority

p. 582

Frackville Manufacturing Co., Inc., Respondent, v. Meyer Barish, Trading as Meyer Barish Manufacturing Co., Appellant.

Headnote

Contract ■ — ■ sale — when plaintiff not bound to deliver in absence of shipping instructions.

Frackville Mfg. Co., Inc., v. Barish, 204 App. Div. 871 , affirmed.

(Argued January 11, 1924;

decided February 19, 1924.)

Appeal from a judgment, entered January 15, 1923, upon an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, reversing a judg

p. 583

ment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict directed by the court and directing judgment in favor of plaintiff. The action was to recover for goods sold and delivered and for damages for an alleged failure on the part of defendant to accept certain goods. Plaintiff contended that it was not obliged to make delivery of the goods until it received shipping instructions. Defendant contended that plaintiff was obliged to make deliveries irrespective of whether or not shipping instructions were given.

Horace London for appellant.

Ilo Orleans and Aaron A. Feinberg for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin, Crane, Andrews and Lehman, JJ.