Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
H. Jolsen's Taendstikfabrikker Enebak and Byrn, Respondents, v. Horace K. Thurber et al. Appellants, 1890 — 118 N.Y. 684 · caselaw · US
Contracts · MBE-tested
H. Jolsen's Taendstikfabrikker Enebak and Byrn, Respondents, v. Horace K. Thurber et al. Appellants
118 N.Y. 684·New York Court of Appeals·1890·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
H. Jolsen’s Taendstikfabrikker Enebak and Byrn, Respondents, v. Horace K. Thurber et al. Appellants.
(Argued January 16, 1890;
decided February 25, 1890.)
Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered upon an order made June 20, 1887, which affirmed a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon a verdict.
This action was brought to recover damages for alleged breach of a contract to purchase all of the matches plaintiff could manufacture and ship in eight months following receipt of order.
At the close of the evidence defendants moved for a dismissal of the complaint on the ground, among others, that no such contract as alleged had been proved.
The motion was denied.
The court here, after a full examination and discussion of the evidence, reach the conclusion that the motion should have been granted.
E. More for appellants.
August Reymert for respondents.
[MAJORITY — Brown, J.,]
Brown, J.,
reads for reversal and new trial.
All concur, Potter and Bradley, JJ., in result.
Judgment reversed.