Thorne v. Deas
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action on the case, for a non-feasance, in not causing insurance to be made on a certain vessel, called the Sea-Nymph, on a voyage from New-Tork to Camden, in North-Car olina. The plaintiffs were copartners in trade, and joint owners of one moiety of a brig called the Sea-Nymph, and the defendant was sole owner of the other moiety of the same vessel.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action on the case, for a non-feasance, in not causing insurance to be made on a certain vessel, called the Sea-Nymph, on a voyage from New-Tork to Camden, in North-Car olina. The plaintiffs were copartners in trade, and joint owners of one moiety of a brig called the Sea-Nymph, and the defendant was sole owner of the other moiety of the same vessel. The brig sailed in ballast, the 1st December, 1804, on a voyage to Camden, in North-Car olina, with William Thorne, one of the plaintiffs, on board, and was to proceed from that place to Europe or the West-Indies. The plaintiffs and…
1Opinion of the Court
Kent, Ch. J.
delivered the opinion of the court. The chief objection raised to the right of recovery in this case., is the want of a consideration for the promise. The offer, on the part of the defendant, to cause insurance to be effected, was perfectly voluntary. Will, then, an action lie, when one party entrusts the performance of a business to another, who undertakes to do it gratuitously, and wholly omits to do it ? If the party who makes this engagement, enters upon the execution of the business, and does it amiss, through the want of due care, by which damage „ ensues to the other party,…
2Cited by50 opinions
- Glanzer v. . ShepardNew York Court of Appeals · 1922
- Ide v. LeiserMontana Supreme Court · 1890
- Marks v. Nambil Realty Co., Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1927
- Gill v. MiddletonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1870
- Banfield Et Ux. v. Addington Et Ux.Supreme Court of Florida · 1932
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.