Healy v. Utly
New York Supreme Court
Error from the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin . . County. The action in the Court below, was assumpsit, by Utly against Healy, upon a special agreement by Healy, to purchase certain ash oars of Utly. Plea, the general issue.
Read the full summary
Error from the Court of Common Pleas of Franklin . . County. The action in the Court below, was assumpsit, by Utly against Healy, upon a special agreement by Healy, to purchase certain ash oars of Utly. Plea, the general issue. The cause was tried on the 10th day of October, 1322, and a verdict found for the plaintiff below, for $63,69, upon which the Court below rendered judgment with costs, A bill of exceptions was taken at the trial, which was in substance as follows : On the trial, Samuel P. Nims was sworn, as a witness for the plaintiff, and testified that, in August, 1819, one…
1Opinion of the Court
Savage, Ch. J.
The boundary, which separates the powers and duties of Courts and Juries, has long been well defined. The jury are to ascertain and determine any facts which are disputed ; the Court are to pronounce the law upon those facts. The facts established in this case, beyond dispute, are the contract between Utly and Spotswood for the oars, the agency of Spotswood, the delivery of the oars by Utly, and the receipt of them by Spotswood, at Coteau de Lac. Had the evidence closed here, there would be no doubt about the plaintiff’s right of recovery. The important question then is, has he…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pratt v. HullNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Foot v. SabinNew York Supreme Court · 1821
3Cited by3 opinions
- James v. AdamsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1880
- Roe v. . ConwayNew York Court of Appeals · 1878
- Schultz v. BradleyNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1871