Abrahamson v. The Canonicus

E.D. New York

Abrahamson v. The Canonicus

65 F. 525, 1895 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10

DecidedJanuary 8, 1895

StatusPublished

This text of 65 F. 525 (Abrahamson v. The Canonicus) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Abrahamson v. The Canonicus, 65 F. 525, 1895 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10 (E.D.N.Y. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

BENEDICT, District Judge.

The payment on June 2, 1893, of $250 by tbe owner of the ship to Francis S. Turner, an attorney at law employed by the libelant to collect the bill now sued for, for which sum the attorney then gave a receipt on account of this bill, was, in my opinion, payment pro tanto of the bill sued on, notwithstanding the fact that only $100 of the $250 was paid over by the attorney to the libelant, and that, some two weeks after the $250 was so paid to the attorney, he gave to the owner of the ship another receipt for the $250, which stated that $100 of the $250 was for services as attorney of ¡he owner of the ship. The claimants are, in my opinion, entitled to have $250 credited on the bill sued for. This being the only question presented for decision, the decree must be for the libelant, for the amount of the bill, with interest, after crediting $250 as paid on June 2,1893. The recovery must be without costs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BENEDICT, District Judge.

The payment on June 2, 1893, of $250 by tbe owner of the ship to Francis S. Turner, an attorney at law employed by the libelant to collect the bill now sued for, for which sum the attorney then gave a receipt on account of this bill, was, in my opinion, payment pro tanto of the bill sued on, notwithstanding the fact that only $100 of the $250 was paid over by the attorney to the libelant, and that, some two weeks after the $250 was so paid to the attorney, he gave to the owner of the ship another receipt for the $250, which stated that $100 of the $250 was for services as attorney of ¡he owner of the ship. The claimants are, in my opinion, entitled to have $250 credited on the bill sued for. This being the only question presented for decision, the decree must be for the libelant, for the amount of the bill, with interest, after crediting $250 as paid on June 2,1893. The recovery must be without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

65 F. 525, 1895 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abrahamson-v-the-canonicus-nyed-1895.