From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Miner v. Pietraschke

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 1, 1916
175 App. Div. 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)

Opinion

November, 1916.


Judgment affirmed, with costs. Held, that irrespective of whether the contract is a conditional sale or not, the plaintiff was entitled to recover the payments which were due. The evidence shows that defendant was not precluded from exercising his option to purchase; on the contrary, that the plaintiff was holding the machine for the defendant, so that upon the payment of the balance due upon the contract the title would pass to him. All concurred.


Summaries of

Miner v. Pietraschke

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Nov 1, 1916
175 App. Div. 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)
Case details for

Miner v. Pietraschke

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE L. MINER, Respondent, v. ALBERT L. PIETRASCHKE, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Nov 1, 1916

Citations

175 App. Div. 967 (N.Y. App. Div. 1916)