Carnes v. Platt
The Superior Court of New York City
This case was tried before Chief-Justice Robertson and a jury. The action was to recover possession of certain real property in this city. Upon a former trial the jury found a verdict for the defendants, which upon appeal* was set aside and a new trial ordered.
Read the full summary
This case was tried before Chief-Justice Robertson and a jury. The action was to recover possession of certain real property in this city. Upon a former trial the jury found a verdict for the defendants, which upon appeal* was set aside and a new trial ordered. On the new trial, at the close of the evidence, the defendants’ counsel made the following requests: First—To direct a verdict for the defendant on the ground that it was clear upon the uncontradieted evidence in the case that the deed of Charles W. Houghton to Charles L., Anthony, covering the premises in question, was delivered, and…
1Opinion of the CourtMcCunn, J.
The appeal presents but a single issue for decision in this Court; and that is, was the conveyance from Houghton to Anthony of the premises in controversy delivered before the 10th of August, 1854, the date of record of the judgment of the Merchants’ Bank of Boston v. Charles W. Houghton % If the docketing of the judgment be prior to the delivery of the deed, then the title of the respondent is indefeasible. If the delivery of the deed were prior to the record of the judgment, then the appellant is entitled to a new trial.
*144The delivery is essential to the effect of a deed; and that effect is…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Carnes v. PlattThe Superior Court of New York City · 1873
- Marden v. DorthyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1896