Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
John S. Leese, Respondent, v. Henry Heins, Appellant, 1882 — 89 N.Y. 643 · caselaw · US
General
John S. Leese, Respondent, v. Henry Heins, Appellant
89 N.Y. 643·New York Court of Appeals·1882·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
John S. Leese, Respondent, v. Henry Heins, Appellant.
(Argued May 29, 1882;
decided October 10, 1882.)
This action was brought to recover damages for breach of warranty of title on sale of a horse. The plaintiff dealt wholly with a third person.. The case was decided here' upon the ground that there was no evidence that such third person was authorized by defendant to sell the horse in question, or that defendant ever ratified the sale or had any portion of the proceeds, and therefore that a motion for nonsuit should have been granted.
F. L. Backus for appellant.
H. G. Place for respondent.
[MAJORITY — Per Cv/riam]
Per Cv/riam
opinion for reversal and new trial.
All concur, except Tbacy, J., absent.
Judgment reversed.