Hyperlawhypertext legal database Welch, Holmes & Clark Co. v. Central Chandelier Co. 140 N.Y.S. 377

← Cases

Welch, Holmes & Clark Co. v. Central Chandelier Co.

140 N.Y.S. 377 Court Argued February term, 1913, before SEABURY, GERARD, and BIJUR, JJ. Decision date 1913-03-07 English

Contents

Majority

p. 377
WELCH, HOLMES & CLARK CO. v. CENTRAL CHANDELIER CO.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department.
March 7, 1913.)

Headnote

Sales (§ 181*)—Action for Price—Sufficiency of Evidence.
In an action for the price of goods sold, evidence held insufficient to show the amount of goods delivered.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Sales, Cent. Dig. §§ 473-491; Dec. Dig. § 181.*]
*For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Seventh District.
Action by the Welch, Holmes & Clark Company against the Central Chandelier Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed, and new trial ordered.
Argued February term, 1913, before SEABURY, GERARD, and BIJUR, JJ.
Henry Silverman, of New York City, for appellant.
William Wallace Young, of New York City (James A. Hughes, of New York City, of counsel), for respondent.

This is an action to recover for the purchase price of stearic acid alleged to have been sold and delivered to defendant. There was not sufficient evidence as to the amount of goods delivered. The witness called by plaintiff to prove this delivery, it being conceded that seven bags were delivered, said that the bags some-, times weighed 100 and sometimes 200 pounds. He testified that he did not see the bags when they were shipped, and was evidently testifying from knowledge received from his delivery clerk.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide the event.