Satterlee v. Groat
New York Supreme Court
This was an action on the case, against the defendant as a common carrier, tried at the Albany circuit in August., 1827, before the Hon. William A. Duer, one of. the circuit judges. - . The facts of the case are stated in the opinion pronounced, excePt that the motion for a new trial was supported by an a®davit that the plaintiffs were surprised on the trial, by the proof adduced by the defendant, that he had discontinued the business as a common carrier, which they stated…
Read the full summary
This was an action on the case, against the defendant as a common carrier, tried at the Albany circuit in August., 1827, before the Hon. William A. Duer, one of. the circuit judges. - . The facts of the case are stated in the opinion pronounced, excePt that the motion for a new trial was supported by an a®davit that the plaintiffs were surprised on the trial, by the proof adduced by the defendant, that he had discontinued the business as a common carrier, which they stated they would be able to contradict, in case a new trial was granted. The was submitted to the court on written arguments, by
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
The defendant was a common carrier between Schenectady and Albany, previous to 1819. He then sold out all his teams but one, which he kept for agricultural purposes on his farm. One witness, bowever, testified, that defendant employed his team in the carrying and forwarding business, as occasions offered, until 1822 or 1823. But subsequent to that period, there is no evalence whatever of his carrying or forwarding a single load, until April, 1824, when one John Dows applied to him, very urgently, to bring some loads for him from Albany to Schenectady, to which the…
2Cited by14 opinions
- Allen v. SewallNew York Supreme Court · 1829
- Johnson v. Pensacola & Perdido RailroadSupreme Court of Florida · 1878
- Chevallier v. StrahamTexas Supreme Court · 1847
- Siegrist v. ArnotSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- Lucius W. Stockton and Daniel Moore, in Error v. Harriet BishopSupreme Court of the United States · 1846
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.