Clark v. Pinney
New York Supreme Court
Assumpsit for money had and received, tried at the Onondaga circuit, September, 1825, before Throop, C. Judge. it appeared by the N. P. record, that the suit was commenced as early as February term, 1825. The declaration contained the usual money counts. Plea, non as-sumpsit, with notice of set off.
Read the full summary
Assumpsit for money had and received, tried at the Onondaga circuit, September, 1825, before Throop, C. Judge. it appeared by the N. P. record, that the suit was commenced as early as February term, 1825. The declaration contained the usual money counts. Plea, non as-sumpsit, with notice of set off. On the trial, the plaintiffs’ counsel offered in evidence, the record of a judgment in the Onondaga C. P. of the term of February, 1822, in favor of the defendant against the plaintiffs, for ⅜193 11; a fi.fa. endorsed satisfied by June 21, 1822, except sheriff’s fees ; that the execution was paid…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per
Savage, Ch. J.
The important question in this case is, whether indebitatus assumpsit for money had and received, lies to recover money paid on an execution upon a judgment, which was afterwards reversed.
The general proposition is, that this action lies in all cases where the defendant has in his hands money which, ex equo et bono, belongs to the plaintiff. When money is collected upon an erroneous judgment, which, subsequent to the payment of the money, is reversed, the legal conclusion is irresistible, that the money belongs to the person from whom it was collected. Of course, he is…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Robinson v. DauchyNew York Supreme Court · 1848
3Cited by33 opinions
- Harrigan v. GilchristWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Peyser v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Gott v. PowellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Dupuy v. RoebuckSupreme Court of Alabama · 1845
- Stewart v. ConnerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1846
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.