Case ID: ny_235/html/0520-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Max Pottash et al., Doing Business as Pottash Brothers, Appellants, v. The Cleveland-Akron Bag Company, Respondent.
    
      Contract — sale — action to recover on contract of sale — defense that title to goods sold never passed to purchaser.
    
    
      Pottash v. Cleveland-Akron Bag Co., 197 App. Div. 763, affirmed.
    ' (Argued January 16, 1923;
    decided January 30, 1923.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered September 1, 1921, affirming so much of a judgment as was in favor of defendant as to the first cause of action and reversing so much of said judgment as was in favor of plaintiffs upon the second cause of action, which judgment was entered upon verdicts directed by the court. The action was to recover upon independent written contracts for the purchase by defendant and the sale by plaintiffs of two separate lots of burlap. The defense was that title in the goods never passed to the defendant.
    
      Charles C. Sanders and Emilie M. Bullowa for appellants.
    
      Clifton P. Williamson and Edward W. Bourne for respondent.
   Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

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