Bucknam v. Brett
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from a judgment. This action was commenced by S. Bucknam, S. B. Hume, and E. T. Bucknam, as part-owners of a vessel, to recover damages for its conversion by the defendants. Before the answer was served, E. T. Bucknam died, and his déath being suggested on the record, the defendants answered, pleading the non-joinder of the personal representatives of the deceased as a defence.
Read the full summary
Appeal from a judgment. This action was commenced by S. Bucknam, S. B. Hume, and E. T. Bucknam, as part-owners of a vessel, to recover damages for its conversion by the defendants. Before the answer was served, E. T. Bucknam died, and his déath being suggested on the record, the defendants answered, pleading the non-joinder of the personal representatives of the deceased as a defence. On the same ground they moved ’at the trial to dismiss the complaint, which motion was denied. The defendants also offered to prove at the trial, that the conversion complained of consisted in the seizure of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.*— Clerke, P. J.
—In actions ex contractu, where one or more of. several parties having a joint legal interest dies, whether they are or are not, in the commercial sense of the term, copartners, the action can only be maintained *122in the name of the survivors. So also1 in actions ex delicto, for injuries to personal property, joint-tenants and tenants in common must join;, and- where one of several parties, interested as such, dies, the action must also be in the name of the survivor or survivors alone, and the executor or administrator of the deceased cannot be joined,,nor can he…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Hedderly v. DownsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1883
- Earll v. StumpfWisconsin Supreme Court · 1882
- H. & T. C. R'y Co. v. HollingsworthCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1884
- Heinmuller v. GrayThe Superior Court of New York City · 1873
- Heinmuller v. GrayThe Superior Court of New York City · 1872
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.