Lounsbury v. Potter
The Superior Court of New York City
The plaintiff brings this action for money had and received by the defendant. The referee gave judgment for defendant. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment. The parties on June 2, 1871, entered into a contract for the purchase and sale of the premises in question. The purchase money was twenty-five thousand dollars, and the deed was to be delivered in sixty days after the date of the contract.
Read the full summary
The plaintiff brings this action for money had and received by the defendant. The referee gave judgment for defendant. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment. The parties on June 2, 1871, entered into a contract for the purchase and sale of the premises in question. The purchase money was twenty-five thousand dollars, and the deed was to be delivered in sixty days after the date of the contract. The parties met to pass the title, and the plaintiff was informed that there was an assesment on the property for opening Riverside Park, amounting to one thousand six hundred and seventy dollars.…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.—Speir, J.
From the oral evidence in the case, it appears that the parties substantially agree in the construction they put on the memorandum. It is admitted that .the defendant did not pay this assessment, but he claims that he paid an assessment of two thousand one hundred and ninety dollars confirmed August, 1872, after he had taken the title.
The referee admits that “strictly it was money due the plaintiff by the defendant, but retained by consent to discharge "this liability,” and he adds “that the agreement for the application of the sum of one thousand six. hundred and…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In re Mayor of New-YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1828
- Fleetwood v. City of New YorkThe Superior Court of New York City · 1849
- Gardner v. The MayorNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- In re Commissioners of Central ParkNew York Supreme Court · 1871