Case ID: ny_230/html/0581-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Henry J. Newman, Respondent, v. David S. Walton et al., Copartners under the Firm Name of D. S. Walton & Co., Appellants.
    
      Appeal from unanimous affirmance of judgment, entered, upon decision of court on trial without jury, dismissed.
    
    
      Newman v. Walton, 188 App. Div. 959, appeal dismissed.
    (Submitted December 7, 1920;
    decided December 31, 1920.)
    Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 23, 1919, unanimously affirming a judgment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a decision of the court at a Trial Term without a jury. On June 21, 1911, plaintiff’s assignor and defendants entered into a contract whereby said assignor agreed to purchase their requirements of certain kinds of paper from July, 1911, to July, 1912. Among the kinds of paper specified was paper designated as “ Imported Swedish Kraft Paper,” which was to be sold to Kaufman Brothers at four dollars and forty-five cents per hundredweight. The contract contained the following provision in reference to the price of “ Imported Swedish Kraft Paper: ” “ Should the present thirty-five per cent. (35%) tariff be reduced, the party of the second part shall allow the party of the first part (i. e., respondent) the difference in price.” On July 26, 1911, the so-called Canadian Reciprocity Act became effective, and this act continued in force throughout the period covered by the agreement. The Reciprocity Act provided that certain kinds of paper when imported directly into the United States should be admitted free of duty. There also existed at the time a treaty between the United States and Sweden which contained a so-called favored nation clause to the effect that the subjects of the king of Sweden shall not pay in the ports of the United States any other nor greater imposts than those which the most favored nations are obliged to pay. Plaintiff claimed that, under these provisions, paper imported from Sweden was entitled to free entry into the United States and that, therefore, he was entitled to a proportionate allowance on the price paid for Swedish paper delivered. under the contract.
    
      James C. Cleary for appellants.
    
      Joseph M. Proskauer and Wesley S. Sawyer for respondent.
   Appeal dismissed, with costs; no opinion.

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