Dunning v. Humphrey

New York Supreme Court

Dunning v. Humphrey

24 Wend. 30

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1840

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 24 Wend. 30 (Dunning v. Humphrey) 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

Dunning v. Humphrey, 24 Wend. 30 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1840).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Nelson, Ch. J.

The plea is bad, as the action is brought for the recovery of unliquidated damages. Besides the costs of defending the attachment suit, the plaintiff here is entitled to such damages as a jury may think he has sustained by the wrongful seizing and detaining [ *32 ] of his property. If it was taken out of his pessession, he may *be entitled to the value of it; if seized and left in hia possession, to such damages as may be awarded for the unlawful intermeddling with the property.

Judgment for plaintiff.

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

By the Court,

Nelson, Ch. J.

The plea is bad, as the action is brought for the recovery of unliquidated damages. Besides the costs of defending the attachment suit, the plaintiff here is entitled to such damages as a jury may think he has sustained by the wrongful seizing and detaining [ *32 ] of his property. If it was taken out of his pessession, he may *be entitled to the value of it; if seized and left in hia possession, to such damages as may be awarded for the unlawful intermeddling with the property.

Judgment for plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 Wend. 30, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunning-v-humphrey-nysupct-1840.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack