Johnson v. Carnley

New York Court of Appeals

Johnson v. Carnley

1 Seld. Notes 162

DecidedOctober 7, 1853

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Seld. Notes 162 (Johnson v. Carnley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Johnson v. Carnley, 1 Seld. Notes 162 (N.Y. 1853).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action against a sheriff for wrongfully taking the personal property of the plaintiff, where the sheriff justifies the taking, by virtue of an execution against a person who had possessed the property, and conveyed it by bill of sale to the plaintiff, which the sheriff alleges to be fraudulent, evidence that the plaintiff (a woman) was the keeper of a house of ill-fame, is not competent, as bearing on the question of fraud.

. Where the plaintiff’s vendor, in such case, had only purchased and received the possession of' the property conditionally, to become his, absolutely, when fully paid for, and he had not fully paid, but sold, absolutely, and delivered the property to the plaintiff; in the absence of fraud, the plaintiff was entitled to recover the full value of the property, although the general title was in a stranger. A special property, with right of possession, is sufficient to maintain such action against a wrongdoer.

(S. C., 10 N. Y. 570.)

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

In an action against a sheriff for wrongfully taking the personal property of the plaintiff, where the sheriff justifies the taking, by virtue of an execution against a person who had possessed the property, and conveyed it by bill of sale to the plaintiff, which the sheriff alleges to be fraudulent, evidence that the plaintiff (a woman) was the keeper of a house of ill-fame, is not competent, as bearing on the question of fraud.

. Where the plaintiff’s vendor, in such case, had only purchased and received the possession of' the property conditionally, to become his, absolutely, when fully paid for, and he had not fully paid, but sold, absolutely, and delivered the property to the plaintiff; in the absence of fraud, the plaintiff was entitled to recover the full value of the property, although the general title was in a stranger. A special property, with right of possession, is sufficient to maintain such action against a wrongdoer.

(S. C., 10 N. Y. 570.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Seld. Notes 162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-carnley-ny-1853.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack