Yates v. Foot
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
THIS cause came before this court on a writ of error from the supreme court. It was one of five causes depending on the same facts and principles, and decided at the same.time, in that court. See Vischer v. Yates, (vol. xi. page 23.) for the „ . ' x J tacts and the judgment of the court below.
1Opinion of the Court
Sanford, Senator.
It is urged that an action to recover this demand ought to be in the name of the agent who' paid the money to the stakeholder; or, if not, that it should be a joint suit by the principals.
The money was advanced by the plaintiff, and was paid to the depositary, by a person who was the mere agent of the plaintiff. In such cases, the principal, adopting the act of his agent, may institute an action, and pursue the remedy in his own name.
The principals- were not partners, and were not connected with each ether, in interest or by any contract; nor does it appear, that they were at…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Johnston v. RussellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1869
- Morgan v. GroffNew York Supreme Court · 1848
- Giles v. . HalbertNew York Court of Appeals · 1854
- Hardy v. HuntCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- Ball v. GilbertMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1847
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.