Fosdick v. Groff
New York Supreme Court
Motion to strike out the third defence as sham, and for judgment on account of the frivolousness of the remaining portions of the answer, and for general relief.
1Opinion of the Court
Bockes, Justice.
By the complaint the plaintiffs seek to recover the amount of their claims against the defendant, to wit: 1st, the amount of a promissory note made by the defendant, for $1311.92. 2d, a claim for deer skins sold to defendant by Austin Kasson, amounting to $1505.76. 3d, a claim for goods and merchandize sold to defendant by Nathan Littauer and Moses Cohen & Co., amounting to $363.21, and which claims, as is alleged, were duly assigned to the plaintiffs.
The defendant, by his answer, first, admits that there is due the plaintiffs on the note, the sum of $1311.92, with interest,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Corning v. BurdenSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- State of Missouri v. State of IowaSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Anderson v. BockSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- Higgins v. FreemanThe Superior Court of New York City · 1853
- Clements v. BerrySupreme Court of the United States · 1851
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cary v. Western Union Telephone Co.New York Supreme Court · 1888
- Kay v. ChurchillNew York Supreme Court · 1881
- Lonas v. Myers, New York County Courts1916
- Turnbull v. OsborneNew York City Court · 1872
- Aiken, Lambert & Co. v. Haskins, New York County Courts1899