Gary v. Hull
New York Supreme Court
IN ERROR, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. Hull brought an action against Joseph and John Gary, before the jus tice, for a quantity of tanner’s bark sold and delivered. Plea, the general issue. The defendants below had sold a wagon to Hull and his brother for 45 dollars, to be paid for in bark. Five dollars only were paid on that contract; and when the time had expired, Hull confessed two judgments before a justice for the balance, being 40 dollars.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR, on certiorari, from a justice’s court. Hull brought an action against Joseph and John Gary, before the jus tice, for a quantity of tanner’s bark sold and delivered. Plea, the general issue. The defendants below had sold a wagon to Hull and his brother for 45 dollars, to be paid for in bark. Five dollars only were paid on that contract; and when the time had expired, Hull confessed two judgments before a justice for the balance, being 40 dollars. It was then agreed that Hull might yet make payment in bark, to be applied on the judgments. The plaintiff accordingly delivered six loads…
1Per curiam
This is a clear case for the plaintiff below. The defendants had waived the benefit of applying the bark on iheir judgment against Hull by issuing their executions tor the whole amount of those judgments.
The agreement, therefore, for making such application, appears to have been rescinded by mutual consent; and there remained no objection to fluids claim for the bark.
The judgment mast be affirmed.
Judgment affirmed»
2Cited by6 opinions
- Binck v. WoodNew York Supreme Court · 1864
- Givhan v. Dailey's Admr'xSupreme Court of Alabama · 1842
- Holbrook v. ArmstrongSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1833
- Smith v. WeeksNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Kneeland v. FullerSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1863
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.