Clifford v. Dalton-Ingersoll Manufacturing Co.
Clifford v. Dalton-Ingersoll Manufacturing Co.
Opinion of the Court
Under the first count there was evidence which
The jury could have found that the plaintiff was entitled to recover under his second count, unless it appeared that Anderson’s assignment of the Rosval mortgage to the defendant was for a present consideration. But this was not conclusively shown, although undoubtedly the jury might have so found. There was evidence that the goods, the price of which furnished the consideration for this assignment, had been bought by Anderson and shipped to him by the defendant at least three days before the assignment was made. The jury could have found that the assignment was given, not upon the present consideration of this purchase and sale, but only to secure the already existing liability created by the purchase and sale. The issues under the second count should have been left to the jury.
Under the terms of the report, judgment must be entered for the plaintiff for $250 upon the first count and $100 upon the second count, — that is, for the total sum of $350.
So ordered.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- J. Timothy Clifford v. Dalton-Ingersoll Manufacturing Company
- Status
- Published