Robbins v. Bingham
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit. The declaration stated, that the defendant, in consideration that the plaintiff, at the special instance and request of the defendant, would credit one Hernán Dickenson, goods, &c. to the amount of 800 dollars, the defendant would be security: for the payment, &c. and averred, that the plaintiff did deliver to Dickenson, goods, to the value of 800 dollars, &c. Plea, non assumpsit.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of assumpsit. The declaration stated, that the defendant, in consideration that the plaintiff, at the special instance and request of the defendant, would credit one Hernán Dickenson, goods, &c. to the amount of 800 dollars, the defendant would be security: for the payment, &c. and averred, that the plaintiff did deliver to Dickenson, goods, to the value of 800 dollars, &c. Plea, non assumpsit. At the last Rensselaer circuit, by agreement of both parties, the cause was referred to three referees, and if any questions of law should arise, before the referees, they were to be…
1Per curiam
The interest of the plaintiff, in the letter of credit, was not any assignable interest; it was not a general letter of credit, by addressed to a particular person. The defendant was responsible to the plaintiff only for the goods delivered by him, and not for the goods delivered by others. The report of the referees must be set aside.
Rule granted.
2Cited by5 opinions
- Evansville National Bank v. KaufmannNew York Court of Appeals · 1883
- Bleeker v. HydeU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Michigan · 1843
- Lanusse v. BarkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1818
- Birckhead & Carlisle v. William, George, John A., James & Stewart BrownNew York Supreme Court · 1843
- Lienow v. PitcairnU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Connecticut · 1785