Samuel Nelson

“ I shall insist that the only right, (if any right there was,) transferred by the banks of Cleveland to John G. Deshler, under the circumstances set forth in the plea, was a thing in action; a mere right to sue George C. Dodge to recover, in replevin, the bank-bills, or in trover the value of the bank-bills, if Dodge had improperly converted them. And hence the Circuit Court of the United States had no jurisdiction.
Mr. Justice NELSON delivered the opinion of the court.
This is a writ of error to the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Ohio. ”

“ The distinction, as it respects the application of the 11th section of the Judiciary Act to a suit concerning a chose in action is this-where the suit is brought to enforce the contract, the assignee is disabled unless it might have been brought in the court, if no assignment had been made; but, if brought for a tortious taking or wrongful detention of the chattel, then the remedy accrues to the person who has the right of property or of possession at the time, the same as in case of a like wrong in respect to any other sort of personal chattel. ”

“ It includes the infinite variety of contracts, covenants, and promises, which confers on one party a right to recover a personal chattel, or sum of money from another, by action.' This paragraph has been relied on to sustain the plea in question; but other portions of this opinion will show, that the phrase 'right to recover a personal chattel,' was not meant a recovery in specie, or damages for a tortious injury to the same, but a remedy on the contract for the breach of it, whether the contract was for the payment of money, or the delivery of a personal chattel. ”