Tudor v. Whiting
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Indebitatus Assumpsit with the usual money counts. A verdict being found for the plaintiff, the defendant moved for a new trial for the misdirection of the judge.
1Opinion of the CourtPutnam, J.
The defendant, being indebted to the plaintiff, in March, 1811, shipped a quantity of sugars from the Havana, consigned to Goodwin fy Whiting, with directions to pay $ 700 to the plaintiff out of the proceeds. The plaintiff called on them, upon the arrival of the sugars, and requested payment, which was refused. But the consignees said they would sell the sugars at auction, and should get the notes for the same discounted, and would then pay *188After some further observations, the plaintiff procured them to give him their note for that sum, payable in thirty days. The sugars were sold the next…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Sheehy v. Mandeville & JamessonSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Tobey v. BarberNew York Supreme Court · 1809
- Johnson v. WeedNew York Supreme Court · 1812
- Holmes v. D'CampNew York Supreme Court · 1806
- Whitbeck v. Van NessNew York Supreme Court · 1814
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Garland v. HarringtonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1871