Chamberlin v. Spencer

4 Cow. 550
New York Supreme Court·Decided August 15, 1825·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Curia.

The plaintiff might have sued for the money in his own name, and is therefore liable for costs. Goldthwayte and wife v. Petrie, (5 T. R. 234-5,) and Jenkins et ux. v. Plombe, (6 Mod. 91, id. 181, 1 Salk. 207, S. C.) are in point. These cases were fully considered and adopted in Ketchum v. Ketchum, (4 Cowen’s Rep. 87.) The only case against them is Eaves v. Mocato, (1 Salk. 314;) but this has never been acted upon; and there is reason to believe, from the mention of it in Jenkins v. Plume, (id. 207,) that it was wrongly reported; being an action on an insimul computassent; and not, as mentioned in the report, for money had and received. The motion must be granted.

Motion granted.

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

Chamberlin v. Spencer, 4 Cow. 550 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1825).

4 Cow. 550 (Chamberlin v. Spencer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lynch v. Webster
14 L.R.A. 696 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1891)
Holdrige v. Scott
1 Lans. 303 (New York Supreme Court, 1869)
Reynolds v. Damrell
19 N.H. 394 (Superior Court of New Hampshire, 1849)