Gleason v. Pinney
Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors
This case was reported in Supreme Court, as a case of affirmance of the judgment of the Common Pleas, where the suit was commenced, and which held that the amount in money was the proper rule of damages in an action on the following note: “ For value received, I promise to pay John Pinney $73 50, on the first day of August, 1822, in salt at 14 shillings per barrel, in good boatable order. Liverpool, June 30, 1820. Asa Gleason.
1Opinion of the Court
The Supreme Court, however, (Savage, Ch. J.. dissentiente.) reversed this judgment of the Common Pleas, holding the value of the salt at the time for delivery to be the proper measure of damages, and awarded a venire de novo. The opinion of Savage, Ch. J., given in 5 Cow. 152, as that of the court, was his dissenting opinion. See reporter’s note; 5 Cow. 411, correcting the error.
In the mean time Pinney had collected his judgment below ; Gleason then took a writ of restitution, and an execution for his costs in the Supreme Court, and the money collected by Pinney on his judgment in the Common…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Gleason v. PinneyNew York Supreme Court · 1825