From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Van Leeuwen v. Fish

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Feb 1, 1900
30 Misc. 419 (N.Y. App. Term 1900)

Opinion

February, 1900.

Wasserman Jacobus, for appellant.

August P. Wagener, for respondent.


It appeared in evidence that the plaintiff, under date of November 3, and December 8, 1893, delivered to one Beyer, a retail liquor dealer, a quantity of cigars to be sold for the plaintiff, upon commission, to be accounted for monthly. Thereafter, the defendant took possession of the stock upon the latter's premises under a sale in mortgage foreclosure, and now claims ownership of the goods in controversy by a bill of sale executed by Beyer, and dated December 15, 1893. There was sufficient evidence, however, to warrant the jury in finding, as they did, ownership and right to possession in the plaintiff, despite his act in clothing Beyer with actual and apparent power to sell, because the defendant, though innocent, was not a purchaser for value, surrendering nothing beyond an antecedent debt, insufficient in law. Barnard v. Campbell, 58 N.Y. 73. But, under the circumstances of this case and the decision of Tinsdale v. Murray, 9 Daly, 446, we cannot entertain this appeal.

FREEDMAN, P.J., and LEVENTRITT, J., concur.

Appeal dismissed, with costs.


Summaries of

Van Leeuwen v. Fish

Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Feb 1, 1900
30 Misc. 419 (N.Y. App. Term 1900)
Case details for

Van Leeuwen v. Fish

Case Details

Full title:BENJAMIN VAN LEEUWEN, Appellant, v . JOHN FISH, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Term

Date published: Feb 1, 1900

Citations

30 Misc. 419 (N.Y. App. Term 1900)
62 N.Y.S. 518