Woodworth v. Curtiss
New York Supreme Court
This cause came before the court on a motion by the defendant for a new trial; and at the same time a motion in arrest of judgment was presented. The action was assumpsit.
Read the full summary
This cause came before the court on a motion by the defendant for a new trial; and at the same time a motion in arrest of judgment was presented. The action was assumpsit. The plaintiff declared on an agreement made on the 10th February, 1826, whereby the defendant, in consideration of a certain article for a water lot in the village of Rochester, designated as No. 10, transferred by the plaintiff to the defendants, agreed to deliver and sell to the plaintiff one of three double carding machines, which the defendant then had on hand, and which had been in use one year only; the plaintiff to…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by the Chief JWtice, who, after reviewing the testimony in the case, came to the conclusion that the motion for a nonsuit was rightly refused ; that the judge correctly excluded the evidence offered, being parol proof, the object of which was to contradict a written instrument, and expressed his approbation of the charge given to the jury, observing that he did not understand the circuit judge as saying that any thing which might have beeii done by the defendant would have been immaterial, but that any thing which he had done was unavailing, to relieve…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tompkins v. ElliotNew York Supreme Court · 1830
3Cited by4 opinions
- Aurora City v. WestSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Radford v. CarwileWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1879
- Champlin v. RowleyNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- Aurora City v. WestSupreme Court of the United States · 1869