Nicholson v. Showerman
New York Supreme Court
Costs against administrator. The action was on a promissory note given by the intestate. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit and plene administravit; the cause was referred, and the referees reported as due to the plaintiff the sum of $175,60; and that on the day of the commencement of the suit, the defendant, as administrator, had in his hands goods and chattels of the intestate to be administered, to the amount of $218,73, The plaintiff moved for costs to be levied of the…
Read the full summary
Costs against administrator. The action was on a promissory note given by the intestate. The defendant pleaded non-assumpsit and plene administravit; the cause was referred, and the referees reported as due to the plaintiff the sum of $175,60; and that on the day of the commencement of the suit, the defendant, as administrator, had in his hands goods and chattels of the intestate to be administered, to the amount of $218,73, The plaintiff moved for costs to be levied of the goods of the intestate. He shewed by the affidavit of the attorney, and the certificate of the referees, that it was…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Sutherland, J.
The motion must be denied. It is not shewn that the demand of the plaintiff was unreasonably resisted or neglected. The action was defended *555apon the merits, and although the defence failed, it does not necessarily follow that it was improper to have made it; for aught that appears, the evidence in the case may have been nicely balanced.
Motion denied, without costs.
2Cited by7 opinions
- Harvey v. Skillman'sNew York Supreme Court · 1840
- Fort v. GoodingNew York Supreme Court · 1850
- Mersereau v. RyerssNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Phillips v. GovernorSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1840
- Vaughn v. StrongNew York Supreme Court · 1892
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.