Agate v. Gignoux
The Superior Court of New York City
The action was brought against Claudius Gignoux, Charles H. Christmas and Tileston Cushing, to recover a quarter’s rent of premises in the city of New York. Cameron, Edwards and Burritt, (Burritt being a special partner,) were the lessees of the store No. 265 Broadway; the lease being to Cameron & Edwards, the copartnership name of the firm.
Read the full summary
The action was brought against Claudius Gignoux, Charles H. Christmas and Tileston Cushing, to recover a quarter’s rent of premises in the city of New York. Cameron, Edwards and Burritt, (Burritt being a special partner,) were the lessees of the store No. 265 Broadway; the lease being to Cameron & Edwards, the copartnership name of the firm. On the 18th of November, 1856, Cameron & Edwards sub-leased the four upper lofts of the store to the defendants, for a term of five years and two months. This sub-lease contained covenants of forfeiture for the non-payment of rent. The partnership of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Monell, J.
If the instruction of the learned justice to the jury, that no written transfer of the lease was necessary to invest Cameron, Edwards & Co. with the title to it; and that they might become the owners of it by the assent of Cameron and Edwards and their own will, and by assuming its liabilities, was' correct, I think there was sufficient evidence in the case .to go to the jury, and their ver*284diet in favor of the defendants, establishing a transfer by parol, will not be disturbed.
The case upon this view was fairly placed before the jury, and there is no such preponderance…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- People v. W. P. HaskinsNew York Supreme Court · 1831
- Livingston v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
3Cited by1 opinion
- Harrison v. JenksSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1871