Pinney v. Wells
Supreme Court of Connecticut
This was a bill in chancery ; the object of which was, to obtain from the defendant payment of certain expenses and charges incurred by and due to the plaintiffs, for the transportation of a quantity of coal and grindstones, pursuant to a contract between the plaintiffs and Collins & Co. The contract, dated the 1st of May, 1833, was set forth in the bill.
Read the full summary
This was a bill in chancery ; the object of which was, to obtain from the defendant payment of certain expenses and charges incurred by and due to the plaintiffs, for the transportation of a quantity of coal and grindstones, pursuant to a contract between the plaintiffs and Collins & Co. The contract, dated the 1st of May, 1833, was set forth in the bill. It contained, among others, the following stipulations: That the plaintiffs should receive of the Lehigh Company 1500 tons of anthracite coal, belonging to Collins &p Co., either at Bristol or Philadelphia, (at the option of the Lehigh…
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
Upon a bill in chancery, the plaintiffs claim the aid of this court to give them the benefit of a hen for freight of certain coal and grindstones, in their possession, assigned by Collins Co. to the defendant, under a contract *115*nade by the plain tiffs, with Collins Co. It is not claimed, that a comt of equity would interpose where there was no lien at law : ('2 Meriv. 403.) but that having parted with the possession under an arrangement with the defendant, this court should give them the benefit of that arrangement.
The general rules of the common law respecting this subject of lien, are now…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Bacon v. GrosseCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
- Fishell v. MorrisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1889
- Fieldings v. MillsThe Superior Court of New York City · 1858
- Olson v. OrrSupreme Court of Kansas · 1915
- Stillings v. GibsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1883
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.