Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

3 Daly 183

Danklessen v. Braynard

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided December 15, 1869

New York Court of Common Pleas · decided 1869-12-15

• Motion for judgment on demurrer to the complaint. The complaint alleged that the defendant was employed as a claim agent by one Griffiths, a gunner in the United States Navy, to collect certain prize moneys from the government; that said Griffiths had assigned all his rights in the moneys to be collected to the plaintiff, and had given her an order on the defendant as follows: “ Please pay to Mrs. Caroline M. Danklessen, of 78 James street, my prize money due me as…

Cited by 1 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently October 1873

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1869-12-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Brady, J.

¶1In this case, the order or draft upon which the action is based is an equitable assignment. No particular form of words is necessary to create such an instrument. Any language indicating a clear intention to appropriate the fund will effectuate the object (Willard’s Eq. Juris, pp. 462, 463, and cases cited). The plaintiff having the equitable title may maintain the action (Hastings v. McKinley, 1 E. D. Smith, 273). There is nothing in the act of Congress of February 26, 1853, to which the defendant referred on the argument which affects this question. The plaintiff’s right to maintain this action is founded upon an assignment of money in the de*185fendant’s hands, which he collected from the United States for the assignor, and is not the assignment therefore of a claim against the United States. The plaintiff is entitled to judgment on the demurrer. Ordered accordingly, with leave, however, to the defendant to answer in twenty days, on payment ot costs.

¶2Ordered accordingly.

/3/daly/183 · .json · Public domain