Ferguson v. Union Furnace Co.

9 Wend. 345
New York Supreme Court·Decided October 15, 1832·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

[346] By the Court,

Nelson, J.

The mortgage to Starks, to indemnify him as surety for the payment of the purchase money, was legal and valid, and the plaintiff in error obtained a perfect title to the oxen on the re-sale in September, 1829. The continuance of the possession and the use of the oxen by Clark and Nichols were not, under the circumstances of the case, fraudulent in law, and there is no pretence of fraud in fact. Without discussing a point which has been the subject of frequent examination in this court, I will merely refer to the cases in 3 Cowen, 486, 4 id. 461, 2 Wendell, 446 & 596, the leading principles of which fully maintain the position assumed. The judgment ought, therefore, to be reversed, and a venire de novo should issue.

Footnotes

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

Ferguson v. Union Furnace Co., 9 Wend. 345 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1832).

9 Wend. 345 (Ferguson v. Union Furnace Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Crews v. Harlan
82 S.W. 656 (Texas Supreme Court, 1905)
Fairly v. Wappoo Mills
29 L.R.A. 215 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1895)
Chicago Title & Trust Co. v. Smyth
62 N.W. 792 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1895)
Ceas v. Bramley
25 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 187 (New York Supreme Court, 1879)
Steffens v. Earl
40 N.J.L. 128 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1878)
Bardwell v. Roberts
66 Barb. 433 (New York Supreme Court, 1873)
Huntington v. Mather
2 Barb. 538 (New York Supreme Court, 1848)
Haskins v. Patterson & Ballentine
1 Edm. Sel. Cas. 120 (New York Circuit Court, 1845)