Devoe v. Brandt
New York Supreme Court
THIS is an action for claim and delivery of goods of the value of $605.91. The defendant Brandt alone answered. In his answer he, first, denied each and every allegation in the complaint, and by his second answer, he alleged that the plaintiffs sold and delivered the goods and chattels in the complaint mentioned to George Samuels, the other defendant, on a credit, and that the plaintiffs herein, prior to the commencement of the present action, had instituted an action by the…
Read the full summary
THIS is an action for claim and delivery of goods of the value of $605.91. The defendant Brandt alone answered. In his answer he, first, denied each and every allegation in the complaint, and by his second answer, he alleged that the plaintiffs sold and delivered the goods and chattels in the complaint mentioned to George Samuels, the other defendant, on a credit, and that the plaintiffs herein, prior to the commencement of the present action, had instituted an action by the service of a summons and complaint against said Samuels, for, the recovery of the price of said goods in that action…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Ingraham, P. J.
The motion for a dismissal of the complaint was denied. No grounds are stated in the case. The defendant now claims that it should have been granted, because there was no proof of demand, before action. That objection should have been stated on making the motion. It might have been obviated by proof at the time. (Newton v. Harris, 6 N. Y. 345. Binsse v. Wood, 37 id. 526.) There was not sufficient evidence of collusion between Brandt and Samuels to warrant *498submitting that question to the jury. The defendant’s counsel asked the judge to charge the jury that there…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Newton v. . HarrisNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ryan v. RandCity of New York Municipal Court · 1887
- Furguson v. United States Land & Investment Co.City of New York Municipal Court · 1890
- Kilpatrick v. DeanCity of New York Municipal Court · 1888
- Coffin v. President of Grand Rapids Hydraulic Co.The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo · 1892
- Falk v. BeeckmanCity of New York Municipal Court · 1888
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.