Legal Opinion

Husted v. . Ingraham

New York Court of Appeals

Decided November 26, 1878PublishedCited by 19 opinions

Appeal from an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, reversing ón questionsof fact and law a judgment in favor of defendant, entered on the report of a referee and granting a now trial. This action was brought to recover damages for the alleged conversion of a quantity of carpets.

Read the full summary

Appeal from an order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the second judicial department, reversing ón questionsof fact and law a judgment in favor of defendant, entered on the report of a referee and granting a now trial. This action was brought to recover damages for the alleged conversion of a quantity of carpets. The findings of the referee were to the effect that in August, 1869, the plaintiff sold to the firm of J. E. Miller & Co. (composed of James E. Miller, Dell P. Peters and Catharine Loeb), carpets to the amount of about $7,000 under an agreement that the purchasers should…

1Opinion of the CourtRapallo, J.

The judgment entered on the report of the referee was reversed at the General Term on questions of fact as well as of law. The only fact however in controversy, upon the evidence, was the date at which the delivery of the carpets was completed. The plaintiffs in their petition verified by the plaintiff Carll, state that they commenced such delivery, cutting and laying down the carpets, on the 28th of August, 1869, and finally completed the same on the 29th of October, 1869. The only evidence conflicting with this statement is the testimony of Mr. Husted another of the plaintiffs, who…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Hale v. . Omaha National BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1872

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Winne v. . WinneNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
  2. McCoy v. American Express Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1930
  3. National Bank of Deposit v. . RogersNew York Court of Appeals · 1901
  4. Hovey v. . ElliottNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  5. Merchants & Planters Bank v. MeyerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1892

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API