Tutt v. Ide
U.S. Circuit Court for New York
This was a demurrer to the third count of a declaration. The count alleged that the defendants [John S. Ide and others], as common carriers of goods between Boston and St. Louis, agreed with the plaintiffs [Thomas E. Tutt and others] to receive at Boston and convey to St. Louis, for the price of $1 25 per hundred pounds, all goods which the plaintiffs should deliver to them at Boston during the month of July, 1S52. and deliver the same to the plaintiffs at St. Louis within a…
Read the full summary
This was a demurrer to the third count of a declaration. The count alleged that the defendants [John S. Ide and others], as common carriers of goods between Boston and St. Louis, agreed with the plaintiffs [Thomas E. Tutt and others] to receive at Boston and convey to St. Louis, for the price of $1 25 per hundred pounds, all goods which the plaintiffs should deliver to them at Boston during the month of July, 1S52. and deliver the same to the plaintiffs at St. Louis within a reasonable time; that, during the month of July, 1852, the plaintiffs delivered to the defendants, and the defendants…
1Opinion of the Court
HALL, District Judge.
It was insisted by the defendants, upon the argument, that the .plaintiffs paid the excess which they seek to recover back, without legal coercion,— not by mistake, but with a full knowledge of the facts; and that the payment was therefore voluntary, and could not be recovered back. On the other hand, the plaintiffs insisted that the payment was compulsory, and that they were entitled to recover back the excess, beyond the sum due under the contract, which was paid by them to obtain possession of their goods.
It was conceded by the counsel for the defendants, that the case…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Supervisors of Onondaga v. BriggsNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Ripley v. GelstonNew York Supreme Court · 1812
- Fleetwood v. City of New YorkThe Superior Court of New York City · 1849
- Hall v. ShultzNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Wyman v. FarnsworthNew York Supreme Court · 1848
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Swift & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Adams v. SchifferSupreme Court of Colorado · 1887
- Mumford v. WrightColorado Court of Appeals · 1898
- Appel v. Mainstar Oil Co. (In Re B & L Oil Co.)District Court, D. Colorado · 1985
- W. Va. Transportation Co. v. SweetzerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1885
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.