Coleman v. Collins
The Superior Court of New York City
Trover, to recover of the defendants the value of 332 barrels of turpentine. This cause, and the preceding one of Van Bus-kirk v. Purinton and these defendants, originated in the same transaction; and to avoid unnecessary repetition, as well as for a more correct understanding of the facts connected there- . with, reference may be had to that case. The cause was tried before Mr. Justice Oakley, and at the trial, Blood was called as a witness by the plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Trover, to recover of the defendants the value of 332 barrels of turpentine. This cause, and the preceding one of Van Bus-kirk v. Purinton and these defendants, originated in the same transaction; and to avoid unnecessary repetition, as well as for a more correct understanding of the facts connected there- . with, reference may be had to that case. The cause was tried before Mr. Justice Oakley, and at the trial, Blood was called as a witness by the plaintiffs. He testified, that in the early part of the month of December, 1829, he was informed by D. H. Robertson, that he was negotiating for…
1Opinion of the CourtOakley, J.
The point raised at the trial, on the ground of a *578mistake in the Christian name of one of the plaintiffs, was abandoned on the argument. The cases clearly show, that such a mistake can be taken advantage of, only by a plea in abatement. [1 Chit. Plead. 460. 2 Brod. & Bing. 34.]
The principal question involved in the cause is, whether the plaintiffs have shown property in themselves, so as to be enabled to maintain the action of trover.
It is quite clear, that the property in the turpentine, was not vested in Robertson and Candler. The proof is explicit, that it was not to become theirs, except…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Estey Co. v. DickSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1910
- Discount Rent-A-Car Corp. v. Universal Carloading and Distributing Co.Civil Court of the City of New York · 1965