Jansen v. Acker & Rich
New York Supreme Court
Error from the New-York common pleas. Jansen sued Acker and Rich in an action of trespass de bonis asportatis. He claimed title to the property under a bill of sale from one James Anderson. On the cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witnesses, the defendant attempted to show the sale fraudulent.
Read the full summary
Error from the New-York common pleas. Jansen sued Acker and Rich in an action of trespass de bonis asportatis. He claimed title to the property under a bill of sale from one James Anderson. On the cross-examination of the plaintiff’s witnesses, the defendant attempted to show the sale fraudulent. The plaintiff rested ; and the defendants, who were the sheriff and a deputy sheriff of the city of New-York, read in evidence an execution against Anderson but did not produce a judgment sustaining the execution, and then moved for a nonsuit. Counsel were heard for and against the motion, and the…
1Opinion of the CourtBronson, J.
By the Court, However fraudulent the sale from Anderson to the plaintiff may have been as against the creditors of the former, it was nevertheless valid as between the parties to the transaction; and the defence was not complete without showing a judgment, as well as execution against Anderson.
It was said on the argument that the plaintiff did not suggest this objection on the trial. That is more than we can see, or are authorized to infer from the bill of exceptions. The plaintiff resisted the motion for a nonsuit, and although it appears that the question was argued on both sides, it does…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Dodge v. GaylordIndiana Supreme Court · 1876
- Cutler v. HurlbutWisconsin Supreme Court · 1871
- Wheeler v. . RuckmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Moore v. MurdockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864
- Sexey v. AdkinsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.