Legal Opinion

Leonard v. . Poole

New York Court of Appeals

Decided June 4, 1889PublishedCited by 40 opinions

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made February 10, 1888, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant Abram Poole, entered upon an order dismissing the complaint as to him on trial. This action was for an accounting.

Read the full summary

Appeal from judgment of the General Term of the Superior Court of the city of New York, entered upon an order made February 10, 1888, which affirmed a judgment in favor of defendant Abram Poole, entered upon an order dismissing the complaint as to him on trial. This action was for an accounting. Between August 13, 1879, and February 9, 1880, defendants Elmore A. Kent and Abram Poole were partners, under the name of E. A Kent & Co., and engaged in buying and selling produce on commission at New York and Chicago. Between the same dates Henry. C. Butcher, Howard Butcher and Henry P. Darlington…

1Opinion of the Court

Follett, Ch., J.

When the transactions out of which this action arose were being carried on the statutes of this state provided that if two or more persons conspire to commit any act injurious to trade or commerce, each of them is guilty of a misdemeanor. (2 B. S. 692, § 8, subd. 6.) The same provision is contained in the Penal Code, section 168. The scheme entered into, by the parties to the contract of August 13, 1879, was an indictable misdemeanor. (2 B. S. 692, § 8; People v. Fisher, 14 Wend. 9; Hooker v. Vandewater, 4 Denio, 349; Stanton v. Allen, 5 id. 434; Arnot v. Pittston & Elmira…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Irwin v. WilliarSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  2. Arnot v. . Pittston and Elmira Coal Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1877
  3. People v. FisherNew York Supreme Court · 1835
  4. Hooker & Woodward v. VandewaterNew York Supreme Court · 1847
  5. Roundtree v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1883

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. United States v. Addyston Pipe & Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1898
  2. McMullen v. HoffmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1899
  3. Pullman's Palace Car Co. v. Central Transportation Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
  4. State ex rel. Durner v. HueginWisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
  5. Matter of DaviesNew York Court of Appeals · 1901

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API