Hancock v. Gomez

58 Barb. 490, 1871 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedFebruary 7, 1871
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 58 Barb. 490 (Hancock v. Gomez) 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
Hancock v. Gomez, 58 Barb. 490, 1871 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1871).

Opinion

By the Court, Cardozo, J.

The money for which this action was brought was collected by Gomez, Wallis & Co., by authority of, and as agents for, the plaintiff, and they acknowledged that they had so collected it, both by their accounts rendered, and by their letter to the plaintiff of October 7,1862. Having so received the money, they had no right to return it to Sale & Co. They cannot dispute the title of their principal, by setting up an adverse title in a stranger. (Murray v. Vanderbilt, 39 Barb. 140. Ross v. Curtiss, 31 N. Y. 606.)

The ruling below was therefore erroneous, and the judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered; costs to abide the event.

Ingraham, P. J., and Cardozo and Geo. G. Barnard, Justices.]

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

Related

Embry v. Galbreath
110 Tenn. 297 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1903)
Largey v. Bartlett
44 P. 962 (Montana Supreme Court, 1896)
Grinnell v. Sherman
14 N.Y.S. 544 (New York Supreme Court, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
58 Barb. 490, 1871 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hancock-v-gomez-nysupct-1871.