Lewis v. Peck
Supreme Court of Alabama
Error to the County Court of Tuskaloosa. Assumpsit by Lewis & Wallace against Peck & Clark. The declaration contains the common counts only, to which' the defendants pleaded the general issue.
Read the full summary
Error to the County Court of Tuskaloosa. Assumpsit by Lewis & Wallace against Peck & Clark. The declaration contains the common counts only, to which' the defendants pleaded the general issue. At the trial the plaintiffs read in evidence a receipt executed by the defendants in these terms, to wit: Rec’d of Lewis & Wallace, two notes on Lamkin, Gilkey & Co. for collection ; one for $146 26, to the order of Jeremiah Boyd, at twelve months; the other for $230 02, to the order of Hurst & Mixsell, at twelve months, the first dated September 17, 1836, the second Sept. 21, 1836. These notes received…
1Opinion of the CourtGoldthwaite, J.
The defendants cite Gunn v. Cantine, 10 John. 387, as a strong authority for the principle for which they insist, and it certainly is so, being almost identical in its facts. But that decision seems irreconcilable with well recognized principles, and we are not aware it has elsewhere been held, the plaintiff must have a beneficial interest in the money to be collected when he has possession of the thing contracted for, and the contract is made in his name. Auctioneers, factors, or brokers, may or may not have a beneficial interest, as their contract may be, and yet it has never been decided…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gunn v. CantineNew York Supreme Court · 1813
- Bryant v. OwenSupreme Court of Alabama · 1834
3Cited by11 opinions
- Exchange Nat. Bank of Pittsburgh v. Third Nat. Bank of NYSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Hoover v. WiseSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Guelich v. National State BankSupreme Court of Iowa · 1881
- Wilkinson v. TildenU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1883
- Simpson v. WaldbyMichigan Supreme Court · 1886
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.