Summary

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Mulhall v. Keenan — Opinion of the Court

Mulhall insisted that the cattle belonged to Tamblyn, subject to his advances upon them, and that the advances were made and the draft drawn upon the faith of the letter of credit addressed to Mulhall in favor of Tamblyn, which Keenan & Co. had given to the latter. Keenan & Co. claimed that they believed, and, under the circumstances were warranted in believing, that the cattle belonged to Mulhall, and that the draft was drawn solely on his own account. The letter in question was an important link in the plaintiffs' chain of evidence touching this issue.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Mulhall v. Keenan — Opinion of the Court

You will make advances on any stock consigned to me, and draw sight or time drafts when there is sufficient margin, and oblige,
Yours, respectfully,
KEENAN & Co.
Cattle were accordingly forwarded from St. Louis to Keenan & Co. at Chicago; and at the conclusion of one transaction Keenan & Co. claimed a balance of $2336.26, from Mulhall, on account of a draft for $9070.73, drawn by Mulhall hall on the 20th of July, 1870, and paid by them, which draft had not been discharged by the price for which the cattle against which it was drawn had been sold.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Noah Haynes Swayne Noah Haynes Swayne Mulhall v. Keenan — Opinion of the Court

The court found for the plaintiffs, and assessed their damages at $2336.26. Judgment was entered accordingly. There was no special finding of facts. A bill of exceptions in the record shows, that during the progress of the trial, the defendant excepted to the admission of evidence offered by the plaintiffs, and to the rejection of evidence offered by himself. Three specific errors have been assigned in this court.
(1.) The admission in evidence of the letter of Mulhall-of the 12th of July, 1870-to the plaintiffs.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature