Seldon v. Hickock
New York Supreme Court
Troven for five hundred bushels of Turk’s Island salt. The defendant and two-others were joint owners of a cargo of sixte.en hundred bushels of salt, one thousand only of which was that of Turk’s Island. The two other partners, being unable to pay their proportion of duties and charges, by the advice and eousent of the defendant, sold their shares to the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Troven for five hundred bushels of Turk’s Island salt. The defendant and two-others were joint owners of a cargo of sixte.en hundred bushels of salt, one thousand only of which was that of Turk’s Island. The two other partners, being unable to pay their proportion of duties and charges, by the advice and eousent of the defendant, sold their shares to the plaintiffs. On a refusal to deliver, after payment made, the present action was brought, and a verdict having been found for the plaintiffs, the application was to set it aside, and order a nonsuit to be entered. The plaintiffs and defendant…
1Opinion of the CourtSpencer, J.
The defendant, with two others, (Lord and Sherman,) who were copartners, were tenants in common of the salt. One tenant in common cannot maintain trover- against his co-tenant, unless the thing holden in common be destroyed. In case of a sale by one, and a receipt of tbe money, an action for money bad and received will lie. In this case Lord and Sherman sold their share, being five hundred and thirty bushels, to the plaintiffs, with the assent of the defendant, and on his advice. He promised to deliver the plaintiffs that quantity, and received from them the proportion of the duties,…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Rogers v. ArnoldNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Trammell v. McDadeTexas Supreme Court · 1867
- Lobdell v. . StowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
- Pickering v. MooreSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1893
- Cochran v. CarringtonNew York Supreme Court · 1841
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.