Case ID: nys_65/html/0563-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HOEHN et al. v. STRAUSS.
    (City Court of New York, General Term.
    June 18, 1900.)
    Mercantile Partnership—Partner’s Sale op Interest—Subsequent Purchase op Goods—Finding— Consistency.
    The fact that defendant had sold his interest in a store to his partner prior to his alleged purchase of goods therefor is not so inconsistent with the finding that the goods were sold to him on his personal credit as to require a reversal of the judgment against him.
    Appeal from trial term.
    Action for the purchase price of goods by Jacob Hoehn, Jr., and another against Herman Strauss. From a judgment in favor of plaintiffs, defendant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Argued before McCARTHY, O’DWYER, and HASCALL, JJ.
    Joseph I. Green, for appellant.
    Julius Offenbach, for respondents.
   PER CURIAM.

We think that the testimony clearly establishes a sale and delivery of the goods in question to the defendant. His contention that the sale was made to another was discredited by the jury. Even though the defendant had, prior to the sales in question, sold the 'Columbus avenue store to his former partner, yet the transaction in question might well have been had as contended for by plaintiff; that is to say, that the goods were sold to defendant, and credit therefor given to him only. We think that the questions in dispute were justly and fairly settled by the jury, and that no . error was committed in the admission or exclusion of evidence.

The judgment is affirmed, with costs.