Legal Opinion

Gardner v. Finley

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 5, 1855PublishedCited by 10 opinions

MOTION by the defendants for a new trial, upon exceptions taken at the trial. The action was brought against the defendants jointly for wrongfully detaining personal property from the possession of the plaintiff. There was no claim for a wrongful taking. The property consisted of mill stones, conveyers, water wheels, saws, and other machinery belonging to and used in, the Bates mills, at the foot of Canandaigua lake.

Read the full summary

MOTION by the defendants for a new trial, upon exceptions taken at the trial. The action was brought against the defendants jointly for wrongfully detaining personal property from the possession of the plaintiff. There was no claim for a wrongful taking. The property consisted of mill stones, conveyers, water wheels, saws, and other machinery belonging to and used in, the Bates mills, at the foot of Canandaigua lake. The plaintiff purchased the Bates mills, on the 20th of November, 1852, at a sale thereof on the foreclosure of a mortgage ex-exected by the defendant Garlinghouse to one' Alfred…

1Opinion of the Court

By the Court,

T. R. Strong, J.

According to the recent decision of the court of appeals in Beal v. Finch, (1 Kernan, 128,) each of the defendants was a competent witness for the other, and when offered generally should have been received.

It is quite clear that the admission of evidence of the expense of replacing the property in the mill was error. The evidence must have been allowed upon the idea that the severance of the property from the building was part of the cause of action, and that it was proper to consider the expense of replacing it, in ascertaining the damages occasioned by that…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lane v. KingNew York Supreme Court · 1832
  2. Morgan v. VarickNew York Supreme Court · 1832
  3. Shepard v. PhilbrickNew York Supreme Court · 1846
  4. Aldrich v. ReynoldsNew York Court of Chancery · 1846
  5. Gillett v. BalcomNew York Supreme Court · 1849

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Potter v. . CromwellNew York Court of Appeals · 1869
  2. McFadden v. . AllenNew York Court of Appeals · 1892
  3. Great Western Manufacturing Co. v. BathgateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1905
  4. Tillman v. De LacySupreme Court of Alabama · 1885
  5. Watts-Campbell Co. v. YuenglingNew York Supreme Court · 1889

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API