Doyle's adm'rs v. St. James' Church

7 Wend. 178
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedMay 15, 1831
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 7 Wend. 178 (Doyle's adm'rs v. St. James' Church) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Doyle's adm'rs v. St. James' Church, 7 Wend. 178 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1831).

Opinion

By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

The only questions in this case are: 1st. Whether a certain sum of $300, paid by the defendants to Dr. Farnan for the plaintiffs intestate, was properly credited by the referees to the defendants; and 2d. Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to interest on the balance found due to them.

It was not necessary for the defendants to produce Dr. Farnan, in order to prove his authority from the plaintiffs’ intestate to receive the money for him from the defendants. The admissions and declarations of the intestate were better evidence upon that point than would have been the testimony of the agent himself. There is no well founded objection, • therefore, to the character of the evidence. Whether it was sufficient to establish either the original authority of Farnan to receive the money for the intestate, or the subsequent assent to, or ratification of the act by him, was a question of fact for the referees to decide. Th^ey thought it sufficient, and I am inclined to the same opinion. At all events, the decision is not so clearly against the weight caf evidence as to authorize us to set aside the report on that grotand.

2d. As to interest. The plaintiffs’ demand appears\to have been an unliquidated account for work, labor and services. There is no evidence of its having been rendered to thes defendants before suit brougt. It certainly was not acquiescedSi?,— and the result shows that the plaintiffs claimed $300 more [180]*180than the arbitrators have found to be due to them. They canno^ under such circumstances, he entitled to interest.

The motion to set aside the report of the referees, therefore, must be denied, but without costs.

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

Related

Clark v. Clark
46 Conn. 586 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1879)
Brainard v. Hastings
3 Minn. 45 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1859)
Robinson v. . Stewart
10 N.Y. 189 (New York Court of Appeals, 1854)
The Isaac Newton
13 F. Cas. 143 (S.D. New York, 1850)
Van Rensselaer's Executors v. Jewett
5 Denio 135 (New York Supreme Court, 1848)
The Swallow
23 F. Cas. 491 (S.D. New York, 1846)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
7 Wend. 178, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/doyles-admrs-v-st-james-church-nysupct-1831.