Guy v. Oakley
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, brought to recover th& . , _ , * ' - , . . , . . Price °* thirty-three kegs of tobacco belonging to the plaintiff,. aud consigned to the defendant for sale, The tobacco in question was, in October, 1813, consigned by q1G plaintiff, a merchant residing at Richmond in Virginia, to. the defendant, a commission merchant in New-York, to he sold on commission.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, brought to recover th& . , _ , * ' - , . . , . . Price °* thirty-three kegs of tobacco belonging to the plaintiff,. aud consigned to the defendant for sale, The tobacco in question was, in October, 1813, consigned by q1G plaintiff, a merchant residing at Richmond in Virginia, to. the defendant, a commission merchant in New-York, to he sold on commission. The plaintiff, in a letter to. the defendant, dated November 1, 1813-, says, that he was in hopes that the _ -11 i _ , tobacco would sell for 20. cents. and that two kegs oi it were ' of a quality that sold in…
1Per curiam
The plaintiff must have judgment upon the verdict as found, without any deduction. The tobacco was put into the hands of the defendant as a commission merchant, with instructions not to sell under a certain price. The defendant, in his character of commission merchant, had no authority to make any stipulation that the avails of the tobacco should be *334credited upon the plaintiff’s note.,,which .was held by ParkhilU He probably supposed -he w-ás -doing an act which would meet the approbation arid sanction of the, plaintiff,,.: But this wás aházard; he-took upon himself; it-wae not within the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Kelly v. SmithU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1848