Belknap v. Reinhart & Deitz
New York Supreme Court
Error on certiorari. In March, 1824, Reinhart and Deitz commenced a suit before a justice against Belknap, claiming to recover of him $30 as a reward for apprehending, in 1820, one Peter Syble, a deserter from the army of the United States. In 1820 Syble was apprehended by the plaintiffs as a deserter, taken to Greenbush, (then a military post,) and delivered to the defendant, who acted as a captain in the army of the United States.
Read the full summary
Error on certiorari. In March, 1824, Reinhart and Deitz commenced a suit before a justice against Belknap, claiming to recover of him $30 as a reward for apprehending, in 1820, one Peter Syble, a deserter from the army of the United States. In 1820 Syble was apprehended by the plaintiffs as a deserter, taken to Greenbush, (then a military post,) and delivered to the defendant, who acted as a captain in the army of the United States. The defendant, being informed that Syble was a minor, told the plaintiffs that if Syble was a minor when he enlisted, he would not pay them the reward which had…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Marcy, J.
The service performed by the plaintiffs, for which they recovered a judgment in the court below, was not, it is very obvious, for the individual benefit of the defendant. The apprehending a deserter from the army of the United States, is an act in presumption of law beneficial to the United States, but not so to any particular officer in the service. It is contended, however, in support of the judgment below, that the defendant, in making the promise to the plaintiffs, did not act expressly or ostensibly for the United States, and therefore, upon the principle of the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Newman v. SylvesterIndiana Supreme Court · 1873
- Jones v. . HenrySupreme Court of North Carolina · 1881
- Nichols v. MoodyNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Perrin v. Lyman's AdmistratorIndiana Supreme Court · 1869
- Crowell v. CrispinNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1871