Munsell v. Lewis
New York Supreme Court
Error to the supreme court. The plaintiff in error brought assumpsit in the court below to recover a sum of money which the defendant had received from the canal commissioners, and to which the plaintiff claimed that he was entitled. The circuit judge nonsuited the plaintiff, who moved the court below for a new trial on a bill of exceptions. The motion was denied, and judgment was rendered for the defendant.
Read the full summary
Error to the supreme court. The plaintiff in error brought assumpsit in the court below to recover a sum of money which the defendant had received from the canal commissioners, and to which the plaintiff claimed that he was entitled. The circuit judge nonsuited the plaintiff, who moved the court below for a new trial on a bill of exceptions. The motion was denied, and judgment was rendered for the defendant. The facts in the case, together with the reasons of the court below, are stated in 4 Hill, 635. The plaintiff sued out a writ of error.
1Opinion of the Court
Gardiner, President.
The only question necessary for the decision of the cause arises upon the construction of the act of 1836. If we resort to the letter of the statute, those contractors only who entered into the contracts and who completed their jobs are entitled to the extra compensation. In this case Lewis & Weed entered into the contract. The plaintiff completed it. Neither consequently fulfilled all the conditions of the law.
In determining the rights of these parties, we must therefore resort to the equity of the statute; and upon that it seems to me there cannot be the slightest…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Devlin v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Fidelity Union Trust Co. v. ReevesNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1924
- Thompson v. Halawa Sugar Co.Hawaii Supreme Court · 1884
- Allen v. . AguirreNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
- Suman v. InmanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1878
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.