Nourse v. Prime, Ward & Sands
New York Court of Chancery
THE bill stated, that the defendants, being stock and exchange brokers, in the city of New-York, on the 23d of June, 1817, purchased for the plaintiff, and by his order, fifty shares of United States Bank stock; and in August following, sold for the plaintiff, by his order, thirty shares.
Read the full summary
THE bill stated, that the defendants, being stock and exchange brokers, in the city of New-York, on the 23d of June, 1817, purchased for the plaintiff, and by his order, fifty shares of United States Bank stock; and in August following, sold for the plaintiff, by his order, thirty shares. That on the 11th of September, 1817, the defendants purchased for the plaintiff sixty shares of the same stock; and on the 12th oí December, three hundred and fifty shares of the same stock were transferred to the defendants, on account of the plaintiff, by Biddle, Wharton Brothers, of Philadelphia; making…
1Opinion of the Court
The Chancellor,
the prayer of the bill is confined to two specific objects of relief, and no other general or particular relief is asked. The objects were, to set aside the sale by the defendants, of the 430 shares, and to grant an injunction staying the suit at law.
But the bill specifies two errors, or mistakes, in the general account current, rendered by the defendants to the' plaintiff on the' 6th of February, 1818, and which account was settled, and admitted by the plaintiff to be correct,when he gave the note for the balance therein stated. The one item is, that 50 shares of United States…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Nourse v. PrimeNew York Court of Chancery · 1820
3Cited by17 opinions
- Butler v. . JohnsonNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Rosenstein v. . FoxNew York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Matter of Accounting of NeilleyNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
- Woolsey & Sons v. Jones & Bro.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1887
- Hancock v. HarperIllinois Supreme Court · 1877
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.