Wendover & Hinton v. Hogeboom
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, for sails, &c. furnished by the plaintiffs, who are sailmakers, on the 6tb December, 1806, for a vessel called the Convention, owned by the defendants. The sails were furnished by the-plaintiffs, on the order of A..Vosburgh, the master. The ordinary term of credit was three months.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, for sails, &c. furnished by the plaintiffs, who are sailmakers, on the 6tb December, 1806, for a vessel called the Convention, owned by the defendants. The sails were furnished by the-plaintiffs, on the order of A..Vosburgh, the master. The ordinary term of credit was three months. It appeared from the custom-house books, that the defendants wer& owners of the vessel in 1804, and there was no change of the register, or any record of a transfer of the property by them, until in the autumn of 1807. Vosburgh purchased the vessel of the defendants, in 1805, and…
1Per curiam
The defendants are not liable. The property in the vessel was not in the defendants, when the plaintiffs sold the sails to the master. They had ceased to be owners. The credit was given to the master. The motion must, therefore, be denied.
Motion denied.
2Cited by14 opinions
- American Car & Foundry Co. v. BrassertSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Thorn & Thorn v. HicksNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Fontaine v. BeersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1851
- Davidson v. BaldwinCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1897
- Scudder v. Calais Steamboat Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maine · 1860
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.