Peters v. Newkirk
New York Supreme Court
Case, for distraining the plaintiff’s goods, when no rent was in arrear, under the act (1 ü. L. 436, s. 9,) tried at the Ulster circuit, October 14th, 1823, before Betts, C. Judge. Plea, the general issue.
Read the full summary
Case, for distraining the plaintiff’s goods, when no rent was in arrear, under the act (1 ü. L. 436, s. 9,) tried at the Ulster circuit, October 14th, 1823, before Betts, C. Judge. Plea, the general issue. It appeared, at the trial, that Newkirk, the defendant, had demised certain premises, being a grist-mill, fulling-mill, house, &c. to the plaintiff, for three years from the 20th of May, 1822, at 300 dollars rent per annum; payable out of the carding or fulling book ; the defendant to have the privilege of taking the accounts as they stood, beginning either at the top or bottom. The lease…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia, per
Woodworth, J.
The evidence as to the basis of Sturges’ appraisal should have been received. The appraisal was irregular; and not conclusive on the defendant. Both parties should have had notice; so that an opportunity might be afforded to submit their remarks to the appraiser, and adduce proof, if deemed necessary. (4 Dall. 232.) The plainest dictates of natural justice require that no man shall be condemned unheard. The right to notice was implied in the agreement to submit. As the appraisement was, in my view, a nullity, the value of the machine was a proper subject of inquiry at…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Falconer v. MontgomerySupreme Court of the United States · 1802
3Cited by7 opinions
- Rockwell v. . NearingNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Donkersley v. LevyMichigan Supreme Court · 1878
- Graham v. WoodallSupreme Court of Alabama · 1888
- Slocum v. DamonWisconsin Supreme Court · 1845
- Pintard v. IrwinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1845
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.