Norwood v. Barcalow

New York Court of Common Pleas

Norwood v. Barcalow

6 Daly 117

CourtNew York Court of Common Pleas

DecidedJune 28, 1875

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 6 Daly 117 (Norwood v. Barcalow) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Common Pleas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Norwood v. Barcalow, 6 Daly 117 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1875).

Pincite

Opinion

Larremore, J.

There is no legal principle upon which this; action can be sustained. The plaintiffs were attorneys of the Bowery Savings Bank, and that relation, in the absence of any express agreement, was incompatible with the existence of any duty which they owed to the defendant.

This feature of the case distinguishes it from the class of cases upon an implied assumpsit, where a relation exists between two parties which involves the performance of a duty by one, and payment or recompense by the other, in which instance-the law implies, and the court may infer, a promise (Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 341; Jackson v. Executors of Le Grange,, 3 Johns. 201).

But the evidence in this case warrants no such inference. The plaintiffs were employed by the bank to discharge a certain duty in reference to the safety and security of the proposed loan. It would have been competent for said bank to have exacted from the defendant the payment of the fee for examination of the title, as a condition precedent to said loan, but there was no such proof; nor was any general usage or custom as to. the payment of fees in such cases, shown to exist.

The conclusion therefore is inevitable, that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed.

Charles P. Daly, Oh. J., and Robinson, J., concurred.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Larremore, J.

There is no legal principle upon which this; action can be sustained. The plaintiffs were attorneys of the Bowery Savings Bank, and that relation, in the absence of any express agreement, was incompatible with the existence of any duty which they owed to the defendant.

This feature of the case distinguishes it from the class of cases upon an implied assumpsit, where a relation exists between two parties which involves the performance of a duty by one, and payment or recompense by the other, in which instance-the law implies, and the court may infer, a promise (Ogden v. Saunders, 12 Wheat. 341; Jackson v. Executors of Le Grange,, 3 Johns. 201).

But the evidence in this case warrants no such inference. The plaintiffs were employed by the bank to discharge a certain duty in reference to the safety and security of the proposed loan. It would have been competent for said bank to have exacted from the defendant the payment of the fee for examination of the title, as a condition precedent to said loan, but there was no such proof; nor was any general usage or custom as to. the payment of fees in such cases, shown to exist.

The conclusion therefore is inevitable, that the judgment appealed from should be affirmed.

Charles P. Daly, Oh. J., and Robinson, J., concurred.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Daly 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/norwood-v-barcalow-nyctcompl-1875.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack