Hurd v. . Cook
New York Court of Appeals
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon the report of a referee. This action was brought to recover damages for the alleged conversion of a quantity of lumber.
Read the full summary
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, reversing a judgment in favor of plaintiff, entered upon the report of a referee. This action was brought to recover damages for the alleged conversion of a quantity of lumber. On April 15, 1864, one Wainwright being the owner of a tract of timber land in Cattaraugus county, with a sawmill thereon, entered into a contract with Wait& Sackrider, the material portions of which are as follows : “ That the said parties of the first part, Wait & Sackrider, in consideration of the sum hereinafter…
1Opinion of the CourtHand, J.
Applying to the present case the test of the court below, as stated in its opinion in Sackrider v. Cook, as to the transfer of the title, and their order would still be wrong. It was error to reverse the judgment upon the report of the referee here, even assuming, as was done in the other action, that title passed to Sackrider & Wait only in the merchantable lumber, and not in that, until after it was sawed and culled. The property claimed by the plaintiff was lumber, and lumber only ; it was merchantable lumber, as appears clearly enough from the evidence, and the fact, even although not…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Terry v. . WheelerNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Stephens v. . SanteeNew York Court of Appeals · 1872
3Cited by9 opinions
- Byles v. ColierMichigan Supreme Court · 1884
- First National Bank v. RenoSupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
- Byam v. HamptonNew York Supreme Court · 1890
- Dennis v. Montesano National BankWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- Graves v. SantwayNew York Supreme Court · 1889
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.