Hyde & Everit v. Cookson
New York Supreme Court
PPEAL from a judgment entered at a special term, after a trial at the circuit. The action was brought to recover damages for the alleged conversion by the defendants of a ■quantity of hides.
Read the full summary
PPEAL from a judgment entered at a special term, after a trial at the circuit. The action was brought to recover damages for the alleged conversion by the defendants of a ■quantity of hides. The complaint set up a contract between the plaintiffs and one John H. Osborn, respecting the hides in question, (which were furnished to Osborn under the contract, and by him partly tanned, when he failed, and made an assignment of all his property to the defendants, for the benefit of his creditors. That the defendants took possession of the hides, under the assign-plaintiffs on demand. That the hides…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Brown, P. J.
The answer admits that the hides in controversy were furnished by the plaintiffs and received by John H. Osborn, the defendants’ assignor, to be tanned and manufactured into hemlock sole leather, under the contract of the 6th of October, 1853. There is one feature which distinguishes this contract from some of those of a 'similar kind which have been the subjects of litigation in the courts, and which goes, far to repel the idea of a sale. It is this: that the identical hides, after being tanned, and mamifactured into leather, were to be returned to the plaintiffs.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Baker v. Wheeler & MartinNew York Supreme Court · 1832
3Cited by17 opinions
- Wetherbee v. GreenMichigan Supreme Court · 1871
- Sattler v. . HallockNew York Court of Appeals · 1899
- Winchester v. CraigMichigan Supreme Court · 1876
- Gray v. ParkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
- Buckley v. BuckleyNevada Supreme Court · 1877
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.