Goble v. Kinney
New York Supreme Court
, W. F. Allen, F. W. Hubbard, D. Pratt, W. J. Bacon, Justices. This action originated in a justice’s court, and was brought to recover the price of certain sap-buckets and a thrashing machine, sold and delivered by James Bradford to the defendant. The cause of action was assigned, by Bradford, to the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
, W. F. Allen, F. W. Hubbard, D. Pratt, W. J. Bacon, Justices. This action originated in a justice’s court, and was brought to recover the price of certain sap-buckets and a thrashing machine, sold and delivered by James Bradford to the defendant. The cause of action was assigned, by Bradford, to the plaintiff. On the trial, Bradford was offered as a witness for the plaintiff, and objected to by the defendant, on the ground that no notice, in writing, of his intended examination as the assignor of the claim, had been given under § 399 of the Code. The objection was overruled, and the witness…
1Opinion of the Court
Hubbard, Justice.
By the Court
It was a question of fact for the justice to decide, whether the sale of the machine was conditional or absolute. There was evidence, from which the fact could be found that the sale was absolute, vesting the title in. the defendant, and a right of action in Bradford, to recover the price, with a right of recoupment by the defendant, if the stipulated repairs were not made according to the agreement. Upon the conflicting evidence in the case, the finding of the justice must be held conclusive.
The most important question is in relation to the competency of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Luther v. BordenSupreme Court of the United States · 1849
- Jagoe v. AlleynNew York Supreme Court · 1853
3Cited by1 opinion
- Clement v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1856