Legal Opinion

Bennett v. Woolfolk

New York Supreme Court

Decided July 27, 1894PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from Westchester county court. Action by Frank A. Bennett, receiver, against Edward G-. Wool-folk and another for trespass on land. From a judgment entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

1Opinion of the CourtCullen, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the county court entered upon the verdict of a jury. The action is for trespass on the lands of one Quinn, by digging holes in his dooryard, anchoring there cables for defendant’s derricks, and piling stones on bis sidewalk. In supplementary proceedings against Quinn, the plain*329tiff was appointed receiver. But one exception was taken on the trial, that to the refusal to dismiss the complaint. The motion was based on the ground that the cause of action was not assignable, and did not pass to the receiver. This is plainly untenable. All causes of action for…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Byxbie v. . WoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1862

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Fox v. HirschfeldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913
  2. Porter v. Lane Construction Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  3. Squiers v. ThompsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
  4. Fox v. HirschfeldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1913

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API