Barker v. Baker
New York Supreme Court
In trover for a pair of horses. The declaration contained three counts. The first, alleged the trover and conversion in the testator’s life time; the second alleged the trover in the plaintiff’s life time, and the conversion after his death; and the third, both trover and conversion after his death.
Read the full summary
In trover for a pair of horses. The declaration contained three counts. The first, alleged the trover and conversion in the testator’s life time; the second alleged the trover in the plaintiff’s life time, and the conversion after his death; and the third, both trover and conversion after his death. On the trial, at the last Monroe circuit, the plaintiffs proved, that after the testator’s death, the horses were founa in the defendant’s possession, and were demanded by the plaintiffs; but the defendant refused to deliver them. A "strong case being made out by the defendant, tie plaintiffs…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
In trover by executors, where the - conversion, which is the gist of the action, is after the death of the testator, they must pay costs, if they fail. (2 Saund. 47, k.) It is true, that in Cockerill et ux. v. Kynaston, relied on by the plaintiff’s counsel, costs were denied to the defendant, and the case is not distinguishable from the present. ■ But in a subsequent case, (Bollard v. Spencer, 7 T. R. 354,) Lord Kenyon said there was some mistake in Cockerill v. Kynaston ; and the plaintiffs having declared on a possession after the testator’s death, were holden on being nonsuited, to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Administrators of Tilton v. WilliamsNew York Supreme Court · 1814
3Cited by6 opinions
- Sibley v. SmithMichigan Supreme Court · 1853
- Lynch v. WebsterSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1891
- Holdrige v. ScottNew York Supreme Court · 1869
- Mullen v. GuinnNew York Supreme Court · 1895
- Buckland v. GallupNew York Supreme Court · 1886
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.