Mayo v. Gray
Supreme Court of New Jersey
The action below was brought by Gray against Mayo, to recover a balance of freight to and from Richmond, in Virginia. The declaration contained several counts, on a general indebitatus assumpsit for work and labor, care and diligence, done in and about the business of the defendant, for freight and [614] transportation of the goods of the defendant. Ac.
Read the full summary
The action below was brought by Gray against Mayo, to recover a balance of freight to and from Richmond, in Virginia. The declaration contained several counts, on a general indebitatus assumpsit for work and labor, care and diligence, done in and about the business of the defendant, for freight and [614] transportation of the goods of the defendant. Ac. One count was for freight of sundry articles, from New York to Richmond, and other articles from Richmond to Elizabethtown, in New Jersey, particularly specifying the articles. On the trial below, the plaintiff, Gray, proved by a respectable…
1Opinion of the CourtKirkpatrick, C. J.
This is a writ of error from the Essex pleas. With the record, there come up several bills of exception taken to the opinion of the court upon the trial. Upon inspecting these bills I am inclined to think that the court below mistook the law on several of the points raised before them; but I shall go upon one only.
The action was brought for the freight of a cargo [*] from New York to Richmond, in "Virginia. The plaintiff, to prove the service done, called as a witness one Noah Bonnel, who was sworn in chief, and delivered his testimony. The defendant then, by way of cross examination, put…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wix v. FrankelNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1917