Agar v. Haines
New York Court of Common Pleas
Appeal from an order of the General Term of the City-Court of New York affirming an order of that court denying a motion to vacate an order of arrest. Plaintiffs bought a bill of goods from defendant, at the agreed price of $165.87, which, a few days later, they paid. Overlooking the fact of payment, plaintiffs, two weeks thereafter, sent defendant by mail the bill for the goods with a check for the price.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of the General Term of the City-Court of New York affirming an order of that court denying a motion to vacate an order of arrest. Plaintiffs bought a bill of goods from defendant, at the agreed price of $165.87, which, a few days later, they paid. Overlooking the fact of payment, plaintiffs, two weeks thereafter, sent defendant by mail the bill for the goods with a check for the price. The bill was receipted by the defendant and returned to plaintiffs, and the check was deposited and collected by defendant. Plaintiffs, subsequently discovering their error, demanded a…
1Opinion of the Court
Van Hoesen, J. —
We think that the order should be affirmed. As Chief Justice Me Ad am has said, the defendant is guilty of larceny, if, at the time he received and converted the check, he knew that it had been sent to him by mistake, and that he had already been paid for the goods which the check was intended to pay for. It is a very significant fact that in his affidavit the defendant nowhere denies that he knew when the check came into his hands that he had no right to it, and that it had been sent to him by mistake, or that he had forgotten the previous payment. He voluntarily assumed the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Alliance Insurance v. ClevelandNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Obregon v. De MierNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1877