Tanner v. Hills
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Columbia county court, where the plaintiff recovered a verdict for $63.75, in an action originally commenced in a justice’s court. The action ivas for the conversion of some corn alleged to belong to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
THIS was an appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Columbia county court, where the plaintiff recovered a verdict for $63.75, in an action originally commenced in a justice’s court. The action ivas for the conversion of some corn alleged to belong to the plaintiff. The corn was raised in 1861, on the farm of the plaintiff, by one Houghtaling, who occupied the said farm under an agreement made and entered into between him and Tanner, dated March 28, 1861. By the agreement the plaintiff agreed to let the farm in question unto Houghtaling “ to work -on shares for one year from the first…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Miller, J.
I am inclined to think that Tanner and Houghtaling were tenants in common of the crops of corn in question, within the principle of the case of Putnam v. Wise, (1 Hill, 234.) By the terms of the contract Houghtaling was to work the farm on shares, for the term of one year, and Tanner, in consideration of the premises, was to pay him the value of one half of the grain and net proceeds which might be produced upon the farm. The case cited was similar in many respects to the one at bar, and the only distinguishable features which I can discover are that these grantees…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Dinehart v. WilsonNew York Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by7 opinions
- Romero v. DaltonArizona Supreme Court · 1886
- Wilber v. SissonNew York Supreme Court · 1868
- Betts v. RatliffMississippi Supreme Court · 1874
- Green v. EdickNew York Supreme Court · 1873
- Gale v. MillerNew York Supreme Court · 1867
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.