Vischer v. Yates
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit for money had and received to the use of the plaintiff. Plea, non assumpsit. The * , „ . 7 mi*» i cause was tried at the Albany circuit, m October, 1813, before Mr. Justice Thompson. The plaintiff, in April, 1813, deposited with Joseph Alex ander, as his agent, 500 dollars, to bet on the approaching election of the governor of this state.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit for money had and received to the use of the plaintiff. Plea, non assumpsit. The * , „ . 7 mi*» i cause was tried at the Albany circuit, m October, 1813, before Mr. Justice Thompson. The plaintiff, in April, 1813, deposited with Joseph Alex ander, as his agent, 500 dollars, to bet on the approaching election of the governor of this state. Before the election took place, to wit, on the 17th of April, Alexander and Philip S. Parker made a bet of 2,500 dollars, and deposited the money with the j i *, i J defendant, who delivered to each of them a certificate in…
1Opinion of the Court
Kent, Ch. J.
delivered the opinion of the court. Two questions have been made upon this case.
1. Whether the action (if any) ought not to have been brought by Alexander, who actually deposited the money ?
2. Whether an action will lie, at all, to recover back the deposit money?
1. The case of the Duke of Norfolk v. Worthy, (1 Campb. N. P. 337.) is in point, to prove that the suit is well brought in the name of the plaintiff; for the 500 dollars deposited was the plaintiff’s money, paid through the medium of his agent, and if the money ought to be refunded to any person, it ought to be to the…
2Cited by24 opinions
- Ruckman v. . PitcherNew York Court of Appeals · 1848
- Kiewert v. RindskopfWisconsin Supreme Court · 1879
- Wright v. StewartU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Missouri · 1904
- Morgan v. GroffNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Alford v. BurkeSupreme Court of Georgia · 1857
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.