Stimpson v. Gilchrist
Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
This was an action of the case, in which the plaintiff declared that he, on the 21st day of June 1815, at Thomaston, loaded in and upon the schooner Fanny, whereof the defendant was master, five tierces and one half barrel of manganese, of a certain weight and value, in good order and well conditioned, from thence to be transported by the defendant and to be delivered in like good order and well conditioned, (the dangers of the seas only excepted,) at Boston unto David…
Read the full summary
This was an action of the case, in which the plaintiff declared that he, on the 21st day of June 1815, at Thomaston, loaded in and upon the schooner Fanny, whereof the defendant was master, five tierces and one half barrel of manganese, of a certain weight and value, in good order and well conditioned, from thence to be transported by the defendant and to be delivered in like good order and well conditioned, (the dangers of the seas only excepted,) at Boston unto David Stanwood or his assigns ;—eleven dollars, freight for said manganese, to be paid by said Stanwood to the defendant, with…
1Opinion of the Court
Preble J.
The objection to the sufficiency of the declaration, that it is not averred that the plaintiff was owner of the manganese, cannot in this form of action avail the defendant. Suppose the property to have been that of Stanwood for instance, or of any other person, Stimpson might well make a contract with Gilchrist to transport it to Boston or elsewhere, and it would not be competent for Gilchrist, when called upon for not fulfilling his contract, to set up by way of defence, the fact merely that Stimpson wras not the owner. Anonymous, cited in Laclouch v. Towle, 3 Esp. 115. Moore v.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Potter v. LansingNew York Supreme Court · 1806
- P. & G. Lorillard v. PalmerNew York Supreme Court · 1818
3Cited by1 opinion
- Northwestern S. S. Co. v. CochranCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1911