Drought v. Curtiss
New York Supreme Court
This was an action brought for the conversion of personal property by the seizure and sale of it, on an execution against one Benjamin Drought, in favor of the defendant Curtiss, and by his direction. The answer sets up that the property belonged to Benjamin Drought, and justifies under a judgment and execution against him.
Read the full summary
This was an action brought for the conversion of personal property by the seizure and sale of it, on an execution against one Benjamin Drought, in favor of the defendant Curtiss, and by his direction. The answer sets up that the property belonged to Benjamin Drought, and justifies under a judgment and execution against him. The issue joined in the cause was referred to E. A. Wetmore to hear and decide in October 1851. It was noticed for trial in October 1852; but a day or two before the cause was to be tried, the plaintiff was arrested by one of the defendants on an execution issued on a…
1Opinion of the Court
Gridley, Justice.
The supplemental answer under the Code is a substitute for the old plea puis darrien continuance; but it differs from that plea in this respect; that the supplemental answer may be allowed on motion, whenever the facts forming the ground of the answer, have occurred since the answer was put in, or where the defendant was ignorant of .them at the time of pleading the first answer; whereas the plea puis darrien, could strictly be pleaded only before or at the next continuance, after the facts transpired (see § 177 of the Code, and Gra. Pr. 256). Where the facts asked to be…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Gillet v. FairchildNew York Supreme Court · 1847
- Hudson v. PletsNew York Court of Chancery · 1844
3Cited by2 opinions
- Seehorn v. Big Meadows & Bodie Wagon Road Co.California Supreme Court · 1882
- Ponca State Bank v. AdebarSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1915