Murdock v. Aikin
New York Supreme Court
THIS action was brought against David Aikin, as supervisor of the town of Venice in the county of Cayuga, and Judah W. Bathbun and Hamilton Avery, as rail road commissioners of said town.
Read the full summary
THIS action was brought against David Aikin, as supervisor of the town of Venice in the county of Cayuga, and Judah W. Bathbun and Hamilton Avery, as rail road commissioners of said town. The complaint alleged that said David Aikin, in the month of March, 1857, was duly elected supervisor of said town for that year, and that he immediately thereafter duly qualified as such supervisor, and has from that time acted, and now acts as such supervisor of such town; that said Judah W. Bathbun and Hamilton Avery were, and each of them was in said month of March duly elected rail road commissioners of…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Johnson J.
The only question presented by this case is, whether the defendants are liable to an action at the suit of the plaintiff to recover the moneys in their hands, which had been collected and placed there, for the purpose of paying the interest of the debt due by the town. The plaintiff was nonsuited at the circuit, on the ground that there was no privity between him and. the defendants. The money was paid to the defendants in pursuance of the requirements of the statute. And the statute made it their duty to pay the money thus in their hands, in satisfaction of the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Ross v. CurtisNew York Supreme Court · 1859
- People Ex Rel. Martin v. . BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- People ex rel. Martin v. BrownNew York Court of Appeals · 1873
- Shepherd's Fold v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1882