Chester v. Comstock
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. On the 18th day of February, 1860, the defendant was the owner of a contract made by him in July, 1858, with one Stewart, of Detroit, for the sale of certain steamers owned by the latter, and claimed to be entitled to recover from the latter on that contract, the sum of $10,000. On that day the defendant sold and assigned such contract to .the plaintiff, by an assignment in writing, with a covenant against any acts…
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment entered upon the report of a referee. On the 18th day of February, 1860, the defendant was the owner of a contract made by him in July, 1858, with one Stewart, of Detroit, for the sale of certain steamers owned by the latter, and claimed to be entitled to recover from the latter on that contract, the sum of $10,000. On that day the defendant sold and assigned such contract to .the plaintiff, by an assignment in writing, with a covenant against any acts on his part impairing the claim. The plaintiff had previously been consulted, as an attorney, by the defendant, in…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Robertson, Ch. J.
The fraudulent representation on which the case depends, which was put at issue by the pleadings, was the assertion of the defendant that a Mr. Stewart, against whom he held the claim mentioned in the complaint, sold by him to the plaintiff, was “ wealthy and abundantly responsible for any judgment that might be recovered against him.” The referee found that he had made a somewhat different representation, to wit, '“that Stewart was perfectly good, and if any judgment was recovered against him, there would be no difficulty in recovering the money ;” also, that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Russell v. Clark's ExecutorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1812
- Mead v. . BunnNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Hubbard v. . BriggsNew York Court of Appeals · 1865
- Sharp v. Mayor of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1863
- Wakeman v. DalleyNew York Supreme Court · 1865
3Cited by1 opinion
- McLear & Kendall v. Succession of HunsickerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1877