Pierson v. Townsend & Townsend
New York Supreme Court
' Demurrer to declaration. The action was trover, and the plaintiff declared, for that the plaintiff on, &c., at &c., was lawfully possessed as of his own property, of a certain contract bearing date May 21st, 1841, for the delivery of possession to one Charles Tripp or his assigns, of three dwelling houses, situate in the city of Albany—[giving the particular location and description of the houses]—which said contract was of great value to the plaintiff, to wit, of the…
Read the full summary
' Demurrer to declaration. The action was trover, and the plaintiff declared, for that the plaintiff on, &c., at &c., was lawfully possessed as of his own property, of a certain contract bearing date May 21st, 1841, for the delivery of possession to one Charles Tripp or his assigns, of three dwelling houses, situate in the city of Albany—[giving the particular location and description of the houses]—which said contract was of great value to the plaintiff, to wit, of the value of $7000 of lawful money; and then alleging a loss and conversion of the contract, in the usual form. There was…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Bronson, J.
In traver for a bond or other written instrument, the plaintiff need not give the date, or recite any part of the deed in his declaration. Not having possession of the instrument, he may be unable to do so without- the danger of being defeated on the ground of variance. But he must show—what is omitted in this case— who are the parties to the contract. All the precedents are so. (Upchard v. Tatam, Cro. Jac. 637; Wilson v. Chambers, Cro. Car. 262; Clowes v. Hawley, 12 John. 484; Bissell v. Drake, 19 id. 66; Harrison v. Vallance, 1 Bing. 45; Arnold v. Jefferson, Ld.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Clowes v. HawleyNew York Supreme Court · 1815