Lewis & Pelton v. Berry
New York Supreme Court
THIS action was brought upon an order in favor of the plaintiffs, drawn by one Starring upon the defendant, for $100, as foEows: “Illicit, H. Y., June 14,1871. George Berry, pay to Lewis & Pelton one hundred doEars and charge to my account.
Read the full summary
THIS action was brought upon an order in favor of the plaintiffs, drawn by one Starring upon the defendant, for $100, as foEows: “Illicit, H. Y., June 14,1871. George Berry, pay to Lewis & Pelton one hundred doEars and charge to my account. (Signed) Jacob H. Starring. ” Starring, the drawer of said order, was indebted to the plaintiffs in the amount of said order at the time it was given, and was at work for the defendant on a contract for building a house, under which he was entitled to receive from the defendant payments as foEows: Two hundred doEars when the ceEar was completed; three…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, E. Darwin Smith, J.
It does not distinctly appear in the case upon what ground the cause was put to the jury.
The charge is not given, and no points seem to have been made at the trial, in respect to it. We must therefore assume that the charge was satisfactory to both parties, and presented the case upon the correct legal principles to the jury.
Assuming, as we must, therefore, that upon the law the jury were advised that the plaintiffs had no legal right of action upon the order, the same not having been accepted, but if they believed that it was given as, and understood by the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Smith v. . the New York Central Railroad CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
3Cited by3 opinions
- Curry v. . PowersNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- J. E. Jones & Co. v. Pacific Wood, Lumber & Flume Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1878
- Weinhauer v. MorrisonNew York Supreme Court · 1888