Halsted v. Schmelzel
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, tried the 8th of December, 1818, at the New-York Sittings, before the late chief justice. In October, 1815, the plaintiffs and defendant made a joint purchase, from Caines & Crary, of a quantity of French goods, to the amount of 18,608 dollars 33 cents, and tire plaintiffs gave their notes for one half the amount, and the defendant gave his note for the other half.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit, tried the 8th of December, 1818, at the New-York Sittings, before the late chief justice. In October, 1815, the plaintiffs and defendant made a joint purchase, from Caines & Crary, of a quantity of French goods, to the amount of 18,608 dollars 33 cents, and tire plaintiffs gave their notes for one half the amount, and the defendant gave his note for the other half. On the 15th of October, 1818, Seymour & St. John purchased from the plaintiffs and defendant, one case of goods, for 2,583 dollars and 84 cents, at a credit of five months; and, before the…
1Per curiam
The objection that this demand arises out of a partnership concern is conclusive. There has not been a liquidation of the demand, and, certainly, nothing like an express promise to pay it. The merits, also, of this case, are with the defendant. The compromise made by the plaintiff's was unjustifiable. The weight of evidence is clear, that Seymour was always able to pay the debt. The plaintiffs received the debt as their own, and have treated it as such, and have acted in such a manner as to take away all right to throw any part of the loss on the defendant. There must be a new trial, with…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Belanger v. DanaNew York Supreme Court · 1889
- Pattison v. BlanchardNew York Supreme Court · 1849
- Attwater v. FowlerThe Superior Court of New York City · 1828
- Bloss v. ChittendenNew York Supreme Court · 1873
- Maguire v. PingreeSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1849