Penny v. Black
The Superior Court of New York City
This was an action to recover possession of a chronometer, to which the plaintiff claimed to be entitled as bailee for hire of one Frederick Creighton.
Read the full summary
This was an action to recover possession of a chronometer, to which the plaintiff claimed to be entitled as bailee for hire of one Frederick Creighton. The instrument in question, which was numbered 1,354, had been the property of Mr. Creighton, in the year 1853; prior to that time it had belonged to the firm of Bliss & Creighton, of which he was a member, and which had conducted the business of manufacturing, selling and letting out similar instruments for upwards of twenty years. These instruments were numbered, for the purpose of identification. On the dissolution of that firm, their stock…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court—Robertson, J.
It is plain, that the question first passed upon by the Referee, of the property in the article in question, lies at the foundation of the plaintiff’s right of possession.
Unless Creighton, on the formation of the firm of Creighton & Black, actually transferred and delivered the article in question, so as to become the joint property of the partners, he would still remain the owner. Ho mere agreement to contribute any articles, to become the subject of partnership dealings, would be sufficient, without an actual transfer and delivery; nor would even the subsequent…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Rogers v. Hosack's ExecutorsNew York Supreme Court · 1837
- Chase v. BarrettNew York Court of Chancery · 1833
- Everett v. CoeNew York Supreme Court · 1848
3Cited by2 opinions
- Quinn v. ReedNew York Supreme Court · 1914
- Coleman v. EyreThe Superior Court of New York City · 1869