Scholey v. . Mumford
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
That the sum paid by the plaintiff to the defendants was illegally demanded, and that they had no just right to it, is not denied. But they claim to retain it on the ground that the payment was voluntary; and they cite the elementary rule, "that, by submitting to the demand, he that pays the money gives it to whom he pays it, and makes it his, and closes the transaction between them."
The court, at the trial, sustained this claim of the defendants, and decided that, although the defendants were not entitled to the commissions claimed, yet, the payment thereof, in the manner proved, was a…
2Cited by32 opinions
- The First National Bank of Cincinnati v. Sidney Pepper, Elsie W. Cox, Defendants-Cross-Claimants-Appellants, Modern Talking Picture Service, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1972
- Hackley v. HeadleyMichigan Supreme Court · 1881
- Kilpatrick v. . Germania Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1905
- Grad v. RobertsNew York Court of Appeals · 1964
- Deshong v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.