Hendricks v. Mount
Supreme Court of New Jersey
in CASE. THIS was a writ of error to the Court of Common pleas Essex. The cause was tried there in January, 1819. The plaintiffs produced, proved, and read in evidence, a bfu 0f sale, dated the 6th of November, 1816, from one . . . Elijah Day, to them, with an inventory of certain goods thereto annexed, being'the goods stated in the declaration.
Read the full summary
in CASE. THIS was a writ of error to the Court of Common pleas Essex. The cause was tried there in January, 1819. The plaintiffs produced, proved, and read in evidence, a bfu 0f sale, dated the 6th of November, 1816, from one . . . Elijah Day, to them, with an inventory of certain goods thereto annexed, being'the goods stated in the declaration. They then offered Day as a witness, to whose competency the defendant objected, and in support 0f the objection, offered and read in evidence, a petition of his, as an insolvent debtor, to the Court of Common Pleas of the county of Essex, dated the…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the court.
Southard J.
If I understand this case correctly, Hendricks, who was the defendant below, had no claim, of any kind, to a property in the goods for which the action was brought. Day, who once owned them, had been indebted to him about $440, but had secured that debt, by a mortgage on other property, and had eventually paid the debt, by transferring that property, and had received a receipt and discharge in full. Hendricks was, therefore, not a creditor; he could not, in this action, set up the rights of a creditor, by way of defence. The goods had merely been left with him,…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Beall v. New York & New Jersey Water Co.New Jersey Court of Chancery · 1917
- Mack & Davis v. DotyMichigan Court of Chancery · 1841