Franklin v. Low & Swartwout
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit for money had and received by the intestate. Plea, general issue. The cause was tried at the New-York sittings, the 23d April, 1805, before Mr. Justice Thompson, when the jury, by consent, found a verdict for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court on the following case, On the 13th day of May, 1803, the agent of the plain»» tiff put into the post-office, at New-York, a letter directed to the plaintiff at Providence, in the state of…
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit for money had and received by the intestate. Plea, general issue. The cause was tried at the New-York sittings, the 23d April, 1805, before Mr. Justice Thompson, when the jury, by consent, found a verdict for the plaintiff, subject to the opinion of the court on the following case, On the 13th day of May, 1803, the agent of the plain»» tiff put into the post-office, at New-York, a letter directed to the plaintiff at Providence, in the state of Rhode-Island, where he resided, containing eight hundred dollars, in bank notes issued by the bank of the United…
1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.
The only question in this case is, whether any suit can be maintained against the representatives of a deceased postmaster, for the embezzlement of money by a clerk in the office, by taking the same out of a letter deposited in the office for transportation by thd mail.
i I think that this action is not maintainable against the representatives. I avoid giving any opinion whether the principal, if alive, would be responsible for the fidelity of thé clerk, either under the particular circumstances of this case, or on general grounds. It is a general and universal proposition that personal…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Wills v. KaneSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1853
- Garvey v. CareyThe Superior Court of New York City · 1868