Linnendoll v. Doe & Terhune
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of trespass for taking and carrying away two horses, the property of the plaintiff, which was tried before his honour, the chief justice, at the Saratoga circuit, in September, 1816..
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of trespass for taking and carrying away two horses, the property of the plaintiff, which was tried before his honour, the chief justice, at the Saratoga circuit, in September, 1816.. It appeared, that when the plaintiff was about sixteen years of age, his father told him, that if he would take one of his mares to horse, and pay for the same, the foal should be bis property: the plaintiff did so,, and the foal, which is a spotted horse, and one of the horses in question, was always called and considered as the plaintiff’s, although it was kept in his father’s pasture, free…
1Per curiam
There is no ground whatever, upon which the plaintiff’s right to the horse, called in the case the spotted horse, can be questioned. None of the rules or principles of law, in relation to the gift of a chattel, are applicable to the case. The mode and manner in which the plaintiff acquired his right excludes any such application. But, admitting this is to be considered as a gift, every thing was done that the law required to vest the property in the plaintiff; he always had the complete and uncontrolled possession, and used and treated the horse as his own.(a)
Nor is there any thing to impeach…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Kellogg v. LovelyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Horsey v. KnowlesCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1891
- Sherman v. SlaybackNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Herod v. BartleyIllinois Supreme Court · 1853
- Bissell v. HuntingtonSuperior Court of New Hampshire · 1819
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.