Scoville v. Kent
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order. This action was brought by George B. Scoville, plaintiff and appellant, against Justus R. Kent and Charles H. Comstock, defendants and respondents. It came before the court on appeal from an order of the special term, directing the clerk to retax the costs, by allowing costs to the plaintiff before service of the defendant’s answer, and to the defendant after such answer was served.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order. This action was brought by George B. Scoville, plaintiff and appellant, against Justus R. Kent and Charles H. Comstock, defendants and respondents. It came before the court on appeal from an order of the special term, directing the clerk to retax the costs, by allowing costs to the plaintiff before service of the defendant’s answer, and to the defendant after such answer was served. The plaintiff’s complaint_demanded judgment for the amount of a promissory note of seven hundred and twenty dollars, dated June 11, 1867. Before answer, and on October 26, 1867, the…
1Opinion of the CourtMorgan, J.
It is very clear that if the plaintiff had not applied for and procured an order requiring the defendants to satisfy his demand over and above the one hundred and fifty dollars, the;final recovery would have been in his favor for the balance of the note. Deducting the defendants’ damages, there would have been found due the plaintiff five hundred and seventy dollars, with interest from the day of the note. But this amount had been satisfied before trial, with the consent, and at the request, of the plaintiff", so that on the trial of the action the defendants, instead of the plaintiff, ob*19taine…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Hoe v. . SanbornNew York Court of Appeals · 1867
- Lewis v. SpencerNew York Supreme Court · 1834
- Godfry v. VancottNew York Supreme Court · 1816
- Hoe v. SanbornNew York Supreme Court · 1862
- Tae Troy City Bank v. GrantNew York Supreme Court · 1845
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.