Hale v. Boardman
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an appeal to the general term, from the judgment entered in this cause pursuant to the decision of Justice Gould, who tried the same at the Albany circuit without a jury.
Read the full summary
THIS was an appeal to the general term, from the judgment entered in this cause pursuant to the decision of Justice Gould, who tried the same at the Albany circuit without a jury. One Quimby, being the owner of certain grain at Weeds-port, and being indebted to the plaintiff and others, and finding some difficulty in getting possession of his grain and procuring its transportation to Albany by the canal, on the 14th of September, 1854, entered into an arrangement with the defendants, by which they undertook to make some advances on his behalf, transport the grain to Albany, sell it there,…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Hogeboom, J.
Upon the finding of the judge who tried this cause, which was well warranted by the evidence, it must be assumed that Quimby, who was indebted to the plaintiff, to Bliss, and to the men in his own employ, delivered the grain in question, of which he was owner, to the defendants, upon their engagement to pay Bliss, to pay the employees, and out of the proceeds of the grain to pay the plaintiff. So far as Bliss and the boatmen were concerned, *84he performed his engagement. He had to do so in order to get possession of the grain, and procure its transportation to Albany,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Barker v. BucklinNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Westchester County BankNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Blunt v. BoydNew York Supreme Court · 1848
3Cited by3 opinions
- Kimball v. NoyesWisconsin Supreme Court · 1864
- Riordan v. First Presbyterian ChurchNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1893
- Seaman v. HasbrouckNew York Supreme Court · 1861