Patterson v. Samuel B. Keys & Co.
Ohio Superior Court, Cincinnati
Error to the Special Term. — This is a suit for deposits made by the plaintiff with the defendants, amounting in all to $6,000,- with which for commissions and reward to buy gold coin for the plaintiff, which, it is alleged, the defendants neglected and refused to do, and afterward on request to repay the said deposits, they refused.
Read the full summary
Error to the Special Term. — This is a suit for deposits made by the plaintiff with the defendants, amounting in all to $6,000,- with which for commissions and reward to buy gold coin for the plaintiff, which, it is alleged, the defendants neglected and refused to do, and afterward on request to repay the said deposits, they refused. To the petition are attached three exhibits, dated September 17, 19, and November 2, 1867, respectively, for the, several sums of $4,000, $1,000, and $1,000, viz: “ Cincinnati, September 17, 1867. “Received from Mr. "W. S. Patterson, four thousand dollars on…
1Opinion of the CourtHagans, J.
There is substantially but one issue made-by the pleadings, and one question made on the argument, as follows: Did the defendants in fact make the several purchases of gold for the plaintiff? . If so, we understand it to be conceded that the judgment is right. Some objections to the competency'of certain evidence admitted by the judge at the trial were made; but these, we understand, are not now insisted upon. "Was then the contract executed ?
"We have been unable to find" a case involving similar transactions in which the precise question at bar has been raised; but the cause assimilates…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Horton v. . MorganNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Nourse v. Prime, Ward & SandsNew York Court of Chancery · 1823
- Nourse v. PrimeNew York Court of Chancery · 1820
- Hanks v. DrakeNew York Supreme Court · 1867
- Sterling v. JaudonNew York Supreme Court · 1867