Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1904

Goldbowitz v. Metropolitan Express Co.

Goldbowitz v. Metropolitan Express Co.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided December 23, 1904 · Freedman, Gildersleeve
91 N.Y.S. 318 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Ralph G. Miller, for appellant., Charles Firestone, for respondent.

Goldbowitz v. Metropolitan Express Co.

Concurring Opinion

FREEDMAN, P. J.

I concur, inasmuch as the cause of action originally stated for the plaintiff was stipulated away in the “agreed state of facts.”

Opinion of the Court

GILDERSLEEVE, J.

This case comes up on an agreed statement of facts, in which statement counsel have agreed that the action is for a conversion.

Plaintiff delivered to the defendant a case containing merchandise, consigned to one Feinstein, 36 Orchard street, this city. The defendant failed to deliver the goods, and, when asked for the return of the same, claimed that they had been lost. This does not constitute conversion of the goods. Rubin v. Wells, Fargo Ex. Co. (Sup.) 85 N. Y. Supp. 1108.

Judgment reversed. New trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.