The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1866-01-31
THE STOCK BROKERAGE CASE.
Tho Law Governing speculations II
Stocks, &c.
SUPREME COURT-CIRcUIT

II
Tho Law Governing Speculations In
Stocks, Sc.
SUPREME COURr-CIRCUIT.
Before Judge Gilbert
7naddese b. Curtis vs j. IT. Wainwright and Charles
4 Ssvam-This case-whch has been on trial In the
Supreme Court in Brooklyn for several days past and
| which was published In the Herald . few days
| ao-is a suit TO recover damages In the sum
| Of nfy-two thonsand dollars for alleged
unlawful sale OF stocks held by the defendants
| fer the plaintiff Tho defendants stock bro
ksrs in Wall street. Now York, constituting the
nm Of Seyton Vain wright and, according 70 the ale
cations contained 10 the complaint, were. during the
| months OF February, March and April 1858, Employed
by the plaintiff in the capacity Of brokers purchase
and sell for him such stocks he might order and
direct them to purchase and noid TOT nin unaer ms
paiof agreed to pay the defendants one eighth per
the value OF the stock so purchased or sold under
his direction commission for the sale purchase OF
the same and furthermore, tho plaintiff agreed 10 pay
tho sum OF per the par value Of all stock SO
purchased BY the defendants the said ten per cent to be
| held by them ~ margin TO cover any which they
might sustain by reason o. any fucnaon In tho value or
the stock while held by them under the direction or the
pain and further advance or ten per Mt To be- held
rs marin Also Under this agreement, as alleged the
defendants purchased and sold various stocks under the
direction Of the plaintiff, but 20 general account o. the
state of their margin was ever rendered 70 plaintiff up
| TO the 18th Of April About the 18th of April The
| plaintiff taken suddenly sick, and was confined
| 10 his house for a few DAYS, during which no
heard nothing from his br'ker, ana on going
them he learned that they had soid out ali
his stock greatly deprecated value, they claiming
his margin had out and that they had sent him
several notices through the Post Office and not receiving
nny thereto they had been compelled To sell the
stock consequence Of the depreciation In It's valne
Tho plaintiff claims that the sale was only pretended
one made defrand him Of his rights and that by the
subsequent rise in the of tho stock TINS sold with
any direction from him he has sustained loss to
| the amount of $50 600.
The defence on the other hand commended that 1t was
In the contract between them and the plaintiff
that they reserved the right to sell the stock which they
carried for him when the mary ran out without bind
ing thems Ives 10 give him notice. bat that through conr
tesy they agreed to give him reasonable noc- OF that
fact If possible and that before the stock in question
sold they sent him two notices through the Post
ce requesting him to renew his Margin both OF which
| were disregarded; hence the sale.
Ex-Judge Brdseye closed the case Tor the paintin,
when dye Gilbert charged tho Jury. He said substan-
tally folowsThe dot ndas are stock brokers in the
city of New York On the 10Th o; April 1883 they pur
chased for the pantf four hnndred shares of Harlem
Railroad stock and thousand shar of Bucks County
| Lead Company stock The complaint in this action is
that defendants Illegally and without proper auiho
rity from Mr Curtis the plaintiff sold this stock The
question depends essentially in the way find
in the case What the between these pares II
appears that Mr. Curtis the planting opened an account
with the defendants the condition that he would de-
p0sit margin OF ten per cent the par val Q Of all
stock purchased by the de cndants the said ten per
to be held by them a margin TO cover any loss
which they might sustain By reason OF any Ductuaton
IN tie value Of the stock while held by them under tho
direction the plaintiff, and further advance OF ten
per cent TO be held as margin also me d a.
amount Of Bucks Co MY Lead stock separate ac-
count the plaintiff at all times to keep his margin good
when II became essentially diminished he would make
IL good; on the failure ofthe plaintiff so to do tho
defendants er,ed the right of selling him ont thout
any notice. the defend accorded the courtesy
| plaintiff Of giving him not On the 10Th of April
1868 1t is alleged that this in out and the plain
tiT vas notified through post Office Of the fact If
the Jury found from the evidence that the margin run
below ten per cent for Harlem stock or one thousand
dollars for cks County Lead then it was violation
| OF thr contract In the FIRST place tne jury woio
| to inquire about the margin, and what was
the contract Mr. Wainwright Zone Of ihs dcfcndants)
test ed and eorroborated by other witnesses that
the plaintiff to keep the margin good at all times
and he did not defendants reserved the right 70
sell the stock without giving him notice. but throHgh
COURTESY promised TO mako all reasonable esrts TO do
This very important stipulation, and very valid
form ng an essential part OF tho security for those
III nctuaiing stock, and the risk of It's purchase and
retention altogether upon them in caso Of sudden
decline and this margin formed part OF the security
| upon The loan which had boon made by them TO the
plaintiff tho purchase of the stock The jury there
fore were take the evidence OF Mr. Curtis Mr. VAIN
wright and Mr. wcgort consideration taking ali the
facts into consideration, and II Tor them 10 say
whether this contract was made the jury found such
Contract was made then the Defendants had right to
sell and In the time and in tho mode they did for the
simple rcason persons dealing with brokers' they
&trade grain and psDducs sold through brokers,
sugars and teas arc sold al auction and The customs by
which these trades conducted form part Of the law
Of contract When these gentlemen contracted for the
purchase and sale of stock they had reference TO lis
| chase and sale at the Stok Exchange II the selling
had been made at auction the ale would have been
irregular nud the Judge thought Illegal one but IL
was not sought TO prove this In the pr sent
| case As matter OF law he instructed the
1 jcry that II this contract made in the
manner claimed by tho defence the defendants
| and IN the mode they did. 1t for the jury
\ TO determine that question. IT, however, the
Jury 10 the ccnclus on that the contrast was
not made then the defendants go back their legal
rights These defendants we're tho purchasers OF this
stock and WIRE 'carr g' Al for the pla n,rn and they
were bound, In the airs II special agreement
give plaintiff reasonable of the time place
q selling. If they ind that the address Of the
Post 0llce given by Mr. Curtis as the
place where he TO receive his notices. the notice
sent by defendants an ample notice Mr. Curtis In
his no Sc; but this matter Of law, the defendants
were not bouni t. send 10 plaintiffs house II appears
from the evidence tha the margin out the 18th
nsn good he did 70 not a mako 70 aoSs
the sale the folio ing day was a perfectly 10 nj
| transaction The pln,if says there was a spec al
arrang mcnt In r.. tho Bucks County Lead stock
and the defendants ~ this was 20 be kept for him.
which was also o. be ept good The jury " ~ not 10
deal IN techniciltes and conversation. On the
part OF the plaintiff she margin 10 bo paid do cndants
ten per cent oa ~ stocks except the Bucks Cosnty
Lead, which they TO carry for him margin of
thousand dOlls regard TO that stock the margn
had not run OUT secondly, that whatever rule
applied applied y was no. par' the general
The Judge said 10 was request by counsel instruct
jury thai the paying Of the balance Of plaintiff by
def niants constituted satis.hci'on; but he should
instruct the jury To The Contrary Tho claim for damages
not a subject between them therefore " was
dence Of satisfaction II Rad been stated ON the para of
tho defendant that by law acqiescncc was sacoi
This Is not Tho defendants also state that
this suit commenced in April, 1868, but the suit
was not commenced until the Jan AIRY following
During that PERIOD the plaintiff made compliant
nor sought any remedy by his silence acquicsc ng the
settlement made at the time Tho rule upon that sub.
ject II ths that whore PARTY makes ttement OF
transaction win ul KNOWLEDGE Of the facts, the bur-
den Of isbindng; the plant ratified the transac-
ton then tho jury must ind verd CT for the deend-
ants Tie next thing, the amount OF damages, the
plaintiff emitted to thu highest market the
sold 'r On the 2lsi OF A. 1868, with interest up to
the day Of trial
The jury then retired, ana after on absence OF two
hours returned and rendered Se,dct for DEFENDANTS
The counsel for tie plaintiff wcrs ex-Judgc Lucien
Blrdseyc and Chas ID Crosby.
The counsel for the defendants O. T yenk, Chas. A.
Rapcllo and Alex. w. Bradford