Foster v. Conger
New York Supreme Court
APPEAL, by the plaintiffs, from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. This action was brought to recover $366.51, being a balance claimed to be due for sewing machines sold to the defendant by one William C. Orcutt, the claim having ' been duly assigned to the plaintiffs before suit. The defendant'claimed that the machines were not sold; but were consigned, to her, and that she did the business as agent, on commission.
Read the full summary
APPEAL, by the plaintiffs, from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. This action was brought to recover $366.51, being a balance claimed to be due for sewing machines sold to the defendant by one William C. Orcutt, the claim having ' been duly assigned to the plaintiffs before suit. The defendant'claimed that the machines were not sold; but were consigned, to her, and that she did the business as agent, on commission. The action was referred to a referee, who found the following facts:- That the defendant, a married woman, in the years 1867 and 1868, engaged, as agent'of William…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Johnson, J.
The conclusion of law drawn by the referee, is clearly erroneous upon the facts found by him. He finds that the business in which the defendant was engaged wag her separate business/ conducted *147and carried on by her for her own exclusive benefit, and that there was due from her in that business, and unpaid, the sum of $52.25. And yet he holds and decides that she was not liable in the action, and renders judgment in her favor. This appears to be based upon another finding of fact, to wit, that at the time the defendant engaged in this business she had no separate…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Ainsley v. MeadNew York Supreme Court · 1870
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bogert v. GulickNew York Supreme Court · 1873
- Bogert v. GulickNew York Supreme Court · 1867