Robinson v. Frost
New York Supreme Court
This action was commenced in August, 1850, and the pleadings were framed under the code of 1849. It was an action for the alledged conversion of a large quantity of flaxseed, of the value of $600, the property of the plaintiffs. The process was served only on Frost, and not on Rider.
Read the full summary
This action was commenced in August, 1850, and the pleadings were framed under the code of 1849. It was an action for the alledged conversion of a large quantity of flaxseed, of the value of $600, the property of the plaintiffs. The process was served only on Frost, and not on Rider. Frost alone appeared and put in an answer, containing, with respect to each allegation of the complaint a general denial thereof as was allowed by § 149 of the code of 1849. The cause was referred to a sole referee in July, 1851. The referee, on the 26th February, 1852, reported that the defendant had not…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court, Willard, P. J.
I. It is urged by the plaintiff that the referee erred in admitting Darwin Eider, one of the defendants, to testify on the part of his co-defendant as to matters on .which the plaintiff had not examined him. As the action was not upon a contract, and the process was only served upon one of the defendants, Frost, the plaintiffs, by § 136 of the code of 1849, sub. 2, were permitted to proceed against the defendant served, in the same manner as if such defendant was the only party proceeded against. By going on with the action, without bringing in the defendant Eider,…
2Cited by25 opinions
- Griffin v. . Long Island Railroad Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Graser v. . StellwagenNew York Court of Appeals · 1862
- Duncan v. . BrennanNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Swope v. PaulIndiana Court of Appeals · 1892
- Weidman v. SibleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1897
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.