Tinslar v. May
8 Wend. 561
This text of 8 Wend. 561 (Tinslar v. May) 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
Tinslar v. May, 8 Wend. 561 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1832).
Opinion
I think the motion for a new trial should be denied. The action for money had and received will lie.. The mistake was equivalent to so much money to the defendant; he had a credit to that amount, to which he was not entitled. The jury have found the fact of mistake, and there can be no doubt that ex aequo et bono the defendant ought to refund to the plaintiff.
New trial denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Harbor Insurance Company v. Continental Bank Corporation
922 F.2d 357 (Seventh Circuit, 1991)
Harbor Insurance v. Continental Bank Corp.
922 F.2d 357 (Seventh Circuit, 1990)
Fiona Press, Inc. v. Hewig & Marvic, Inc.
122 Misc. 2d 680 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1984)
In re the Estate of Wing
162 Misc. 551 (New York Surrogate's Court, 1937)
Davis v. Kling
28 N.Y.S. 1026 (New York Supreme Court, 1894)
Stewart v. Conner
9 Ala. 803 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1846)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
8 Wend. 561, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tinslar-v-may-nysupct-1832.