Legal Opinion

Fitchett v. Nanary

The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo

Decided May 4, 1891PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from jury term. Action by Warren N. Fitchett against Thomas Nanary for the conversion of a bay horse, buggy, and harness belonging to the plaintiff.

Read the full summary

Appeal from jury term. Action by Warren N. Fitchett against Thomas Nanary for the conversion of a bay horse, buggy, and harness belonging to the plaintiff. The defendant admits the ownership of the property by the plaintiff, and alleges in defense that the property was sold at auction to satisfy a claim due to the defendant, and that at such sale the defendant, at plaintiff’s request, bought the property in' at $240, and that the plaintiff then pledged the same with the defendant as security for all his charges, aggregating $342.16. The defendant did board and feed the horse until June 1,…

1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.

The defendant waived his lien when he transferred the stable to Heineman Bros., and delivered the plaintiff’s property to them, under á new arrangement, by which the expense of keeping it was charged to the plaintiff. Heineman Bros, became the plaintiff’s agents, their possession his possession; and this voluntary surrender was a relinquishment of the defendant’s lien, which could only be preserved by some understanding made at the time, by which the Heinemans were to hold the property for the benefit of the defendant, and for the preservation of his lien. See Railroad Co. v. Sage, 35 Hun,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Murray v. BurlingNew York Supreme Court · 1813
  2. Bigelow v. HeatonNew York Supreme Court · 1847

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Glascock v. LempIndiana Court of Appeals · 1901
  2. Susi v. Belle Acton Stables, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966
  3. John Susi v. Belle Acton Stables, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966

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

Powered by the Exa API