Humphreys v. Gardner
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of replevin, which had been brought before this court, by a writ of error, from the court of common pleas of Orange county, the judgment of which court was reversed and a venire dc novo awarded, returnable at the Orange circuit, (see 10 Johns. Rep. 53.) where it was tried the 14th of September, 1813. The declaration was in replevin for household goods, See.
Read the full summary
THIS was an action of replevin, which had been brought before this court, by a writ of error, from the court of common pleas of Orange county, the judgment of which court was reversed and a venire dc novo awarded, returnable at the Orange circuit, (see 10 Johns. Rep. 53.) where it was tried the 14th of September, 1813. The declaration was in replevin for household goods, See. There was an avonry for rent due the defendant, and that the plain- ° ' r tiff for one year, ending the 1st of May, 1811, and from thence until, Sec. occupied the house in which, &c. as tenant of the defendant, under a…
1Per curiam
It was proved upon the trial, by Colden, that on the 1st of May, 1810, there was a dispute between the defendant, Gardner, and one Ross, as to which of them belonged the right to let the house in question to Humphreys, and Humphreys being then in the act of moving in, it was agreed by Gardner and Ross, in the presence of Humphreys, to submit to two persons, then named as arbitrators, to determine to which of them Humphreys was to pay the rent for the ensuing year. The two arbitrators prove the same facts substantially, and one of them says he thinks Humphreys spoke to him and wished the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Bush v. CritchfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1829