Houston v. Shindler
New York Supreme Court
This action was commenced on the 16th of November, 1842, in the justices’ court of the city of Troy. It was an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered, and was tried under the plea of the general issue, and notice, and the plaintiff obtained judgment.
Read the full summary
This action was commenced on the 16th of November, 1842, in the justices’ court of the city of Troy. It was an action of assumpsit for goods sold and delivered, and was tried under the plea of the general issue, and notice, and the plaintiff obtained judgment. The defendant appealed to the mayor’s court of the city of Troy, and on the trial in that court the case was this : The plaintiff, being the owner of about 2070 feet of curled maple plank and scantling, which he had brought to Troy in a boat, and which after being inspected and measured was piled on the dock, apart from other lumber,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Willard, P. J.
The facts disclosed on the last trial obviate all the objections to the plaintiff’s right of recovery, which existed when the cause was before the court of *40appeals. As required by that court, the plaintiff showed, in addition to the language of the contract, the acts of the defendant in taking possession of the lumber and converting it to his own use. The statute of frauds therefore presents no barrier to a recovery.
The objection now is, that as the plaintiff’s agent gave a receipt in full, for a worthless check, on settling the first suit, no subsequent action can…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Clark's Executors v. Van RiemsdykSupreme Court of the United States · 1815
- Skinner v. DaytonNew York Supreme Court · 1822
- Richmond Manuf'g Co. v. StarksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Rhode Island · 1826
- Williams v. MitchellMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1821
3Cited by1 opinion
- Champion v. . JoslynNew York Court of Appeals · 1871