Murray v. Gouverneur
New York Supreme Court
In the year 1796, the respondents, Isaac Gouverneur and Peter Kemble, together with Joseph Gouverneur, (since deceased, who. by his last will, appointed Isaac Gouverneur and Joseph Gouverneur his executors,) commenced an action of ejectment in the supreme court, to recover from the appellant a house and lot of ground in the city of New York. ■ After the cause was ready for trial, the appellant filed his hill in chancery, stating that in August, 1795, Gouverneur and Kemble,…
Read the full summary
In the year 1796, the respondents, Isaac Gouverneur and Peter Kemble, together with Joseph Gouverneur, (since deceased, who. by his last will, appointed Isaac Gouverneur and Joseph Gouverneur his executors,) commenced an action of ejectment in the supreme court, to recover from the appellant a house and lot of ground in the city of New York. ■ After the cause was ready for trial, the appellant filed his hill in chancery, stating that in August, 1795, Gouverneur and Kemble, partners in trade, and pretending to be duly authorized by Joseph Gouverneur, (who was then absent beyond seas,) made a…
1Opinion of the CourtKent, J.
I do not consider the bills which the respondents took in January, 1796, as a payment of the 5000 dollars ; notwithstanding they gave a receipt, as for so much cash. Receipts are never so conclusive but that they may be explained ;(a) and we have the Consideration of this receipt fully explained to us. The bills were drawn by Robert Murray & Co. on one of the partners in London. This is, in fact, like a person drawing a bill on himself; the law imposes on him all requisite notice.
Jt is a settled rule of law, that a bill shall not be a discharge of a precedent debt, unless it be so expressly…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Saltus & Saltus v. EverettNew York Supreme Court · 1838
- Sheehy v. Mandeville & JamessonSupreme Court of the United States · 1810
- Dayton v. TrullNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Coit v. TracySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1831
- Abercrombie v. MoselySupreme Court of Alabama · 1839
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Loos v. . WilkinsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Comptoir D'Escompte De Paris v. DresbachCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
- McCloy & Trotter v. ArnettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1886
- Parsons v. MosesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1864
- Wallace v. . BerdellNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.