J. & W. G. Ward v. Van Duzer
The Superior Court of New York City
This was an action of assumpsit for money paid by the plaintiffs for the defendant in the purchase of stock for him and by his orders, or to recover the value of the stock which consisted of fifty shares in the Fulton Bank, of the city of New-Tork.
Read the full summary
This was an action of assumpsit for money paid by the plaintiffs for the defendant in the purchase of stock for him and by his orders, or to recover the value of the stock which consisted of fifty shares in the Fulton Bank, of the city of New-Tork. The cause was tried before Mr. Justice Oakley, and at the trial the plaintiffs called William J. Robinson, a stock broker, as a witness, who testified, that on the 19th of May, 1826, he sold to the plaintiffs fifty shares of stock in the Fulton Bank, at 84 per cent on its par value, for which the plaintiffs at the end of 60 days paid him the cash…
1Opinion of the Court
Oakley J.
I. There was no evidence of any authority by the defendant to the plaintiffs to purchase stock, of a certain character, so as to enable the jury to find any verdict in the case. The only proof on the subject was furnished by the testimony of Will-cox, who stated that the defendant told him, that he had directed the plaintiffs to purchase some stock, and had paid $200 on account. If the jury had been left to pass on this evidence, they could have found nothing. II. There was no proof, that the plaintiffs ever purchased any stock for the defendant.
None was ever transferred to the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Bowen v. ThwingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
- Merwin v. HamiltonThe Superior Court of New York City · 1856
- Staples v. GouldThe Superior Court of New York City · 1852
- Stebbins v. LeowolfMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1849