Reports of Cases Argued and Determined in the Supreme Court of Judicature, and in the Court for the Trial of Impeachments and the Correction of Errors of the State of New York [1828-1841], Svazek 20
Gould, Banks & Company, 1846
Co říkají ostatní - Napsat recenzi
Na obvyklých místech jsme nenalezli žádné recenze.
Další vydání - Zobrazit všechny
Běžně se vyskytující výrazy a sousloví
acceptance action actual affidavit agent allowed amount answer appear applied assignment attachment authority bank bill called cause chancellor charge church cited claim common consideration considered contract conveyance costs court Cowen creditors damages debt decision deed defendant delivered demand denied devise directed effect entitled error evidence execution fact fraud give given grant ground heir held hold Insurance intent interest issued Johns judge judgment jury justice land master means motion nature necessary New-York notice objection opinion original owner parties passed payment person plaintiff plea possession premises present principle proceedings proof proved provisions purchaser question real estate reason received record recover relation respect rule says sheriff sold statute subsequent sufficient suit taken term tion trial verdict vessel void Wendell whole witness writ
Strana 32 - No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal act. If, from the plaintiff's own stating or otherwise, the cause of action appears to arise ex turpi causa, or the transgression of a positive law of this country, there the court says he has no right to be assisted. It is upon that ground the court goes; not for the sake of defendant, but because they will not lend their aid to such a plaintiff.
Strana 520 - Every mortgage or conveyance intended to operate as a mortgage of goods and chattels which shall hereafter be made which shall not be accompanied by an immediate delivery and followed by an actual and continued change of possession...
Strana 38 - The objection that a contract is immoral or illegal as between plaintiff and defendant, sounds at all times very ill in the mouth of the defendant. It is not for his sake, however, that the objection is ever allowed ; but it is founded in general principles of policy, which the defendant has the advantage of, contrary to the real justice as between him and the plaintiff, by accident, if I may so say. The principle of public policy is this: Ex dolo malo non oritur actio.
Strana 275 - The universal and fundamental principle of our law of personal property is, that no man can be divested of his property without his consent, and consequently that even the honest purchaser under a defective title cannot hold against the true proprietor.
Strana 360 - For it is not to be presumed that the Legislature intended to make any innovation upon the Common Law further than the case absolutely required.
Strana 373 - It may well be doubted whether the nature of society and of government does not prescribe some limits to the legislative power; and if any be prescribed, where are they to be found, if the property of an individual, fairly and honestly acquired, may be seized without compensation?
Strana 381 - No member of this state shall be disfranchised, or deprived of any of the rights or privileges secured to any citizen thereof, unless by the law of the land or the judgment of his peers.
Strana 32 - The principle of public policy is this; ex dolo malo non oritur actio. No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or an illegal act.
Strana 278 - The holder of a bill of exchange, or promissory note, is not to be considered in the light of an assignee of the payee. An assignee must take the thing assigned, subject to all the equity to which the original party was subject. If this rule applied to bills and promissory notes, it would stop their currency.
Strana 175 - ... and pay him for his trouble. When the evidence was closed the counsel for the defendant stated that he should not question the fact that the parties were mutually in error in supposing that 500 bushels of oats had been put on board when in fact only 250 bushels had been put on board at the time of the bargain in reference to the quantity, but insisted that the bargain was obligatory upon the plaintiff, and that therefore he was not entitled to recover. He also insisted that the proof varied from...