Case Name: Frederick Lowey, Respondent, v. The Fidelity Printing Co., Appellant
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1895-05
Citations: 12 Misc. 551
Docket Number: 
Parties: Frederick Lowey, Respondent, v. The Fidelity Printing Co., Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 12
Pages: 551–552

Head Matter:
Frederick Lowey, Respondent, v. The Fidelity Printing Co., Appellant.
(City Court of New York
General Term,
May, 1895.)
Defendant’s predecessor failed to return certain plates belonging to plaintiff, according to agreement, after the printing therefrom was finished, and the plates were afterwards destroyed. Upon purchasing the plant the defendant agreed to assume the obligations and liabilities of its predecessor. Held, that this included its liability to the plaintiff, and that he was entitled to the benefit of the agreement although not a party thereto.
Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff.
Philip Carpenter, for appellant.
Wakemam, dk Carpenter, for respondent.

Opinion:
Fitzsimons, J.
The defendant, because of its agreement with the Lowey Company, became liable for the value of the goods in question to plaintiff.
The failure of the Lowey Company to return the plates when the printing was finished, it having been so agreed, was a breach of contract on its part for which it was liable in case any damage followed. Faulkner v. Hart, 82 N. Y. 413; Michaels v. N. Y. C. R. R. Co., 30 id. 564.
In this case the goods were destroyed, and to the extent of the value thereof it was liable to the plaintiff.
That liability or obligation was assumed by defendant in the agreement above mentioned, and although the plaintiff was not a party to that agreement yet he was entitled to the benefits thereof.
The judgment, in our opinion, is a just one, and finding no error it must be affirmed, with costs.
Rewbijrger and Conlan, J J., concur.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.