Wilkes & Fontaine v. Ferris
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of trover, brought to try the right of the plaintiffs to 75 hhds. sugar, marked B. E. which had been levied on by the defendant, as the pro•perty of Henry Cheriot, under a Ji. fa. in favour of William Fan Wyck, against Cheriot. A verdict was taken for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of the court, on the following case.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of trover, brought to try the right of the plaintiffs to 75 hhds. sugar, marked B. E. which had been levied on by the defendant, as the pro•perty of Henry Cheriot, under a Ji. fa. in favour of William Fan Wyck, against Cheriot. A verdict was taken for the plaintiffs, subject to the opinion of the court, on the following case. The plaintiff gave in evidence a receipt, signed by , the defendant, and dated July 15th, 1808, of the amount of the execution,, paid to him, without preju-dice, in order to avoid a sale of the sugars ; and by which the defendants agreed to admit a…
1Per curiam
This is a plain case. There is no colour or ground for the suggestion of fraud. Cheriot might lawfully prefer one set of creditors to another. The whole legal estate of the property specified (and the sugars in question were part of that property) vested in the plaintiffs. The object was lawful and just, and openly and fairly carried into effect. The goods in the storehouses were actually delivered, at the time, by the delivery of the keys of the stores ; and the sugars were delivered by the delivery of Sebring’s receipt, which was the regular documentary evidence of title, and gave the…
2Cited by50 opinions
- Bock v. PerkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Beck v. BurdettNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
- Gibson v. StevensSupreme Court of the United States · 1850
- The Bank of Rochester v. . JonesNew York Court of Appeals · 1851
- Halsey v. FairbanksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts · 1826
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.