Pittsburgh Bessemer Steel Co. v. Buckley
The Superior Court of New York City
Appeal by defendants from judgment entered upon verdict for plaintiff as directed by the court. On the trial, the defendants claimed the right to open and to close. The court directed that they should have the right. Before the defendants proceeded, the plaintiff’s counsel moved for judgment upon the pleadings, on the ground that the answer did not aver any defense. This motion was granted, the court directing a verdict for plaintiffs.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendants from judgment entered upon verdict for plaintiff as directed by the court. On the trial, the defendants claimed the right to open and to close. The court directed that they should have the right. Before the defendants proceeded, the plaintiff’s counsel moved for judgment upon the pleadings, on the ground that the answer did not aver any defense. This motion was granted, the court directing a verdict for plaintiffs. Further facts appear in the opinion. argued :—I. It was error to take this case from the jury, and neither allow any evidence to be given, nor the jury to pass…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court.
Sedgwick, Ch. J.
The action is upon two promissory notes made by the Cleveland, Youngstown & Pittsburgh Bailway Company, and against the defendant .Buckley, the first indorser, and the defendant Ford, the second and last indorser. The question here is whether the answers of the defendants set out a defense. The answer of the defendant Ford will be first examined. This answer contains no defense, unless it be that of want of consideration for the indorsements or of a failure of consideration. The allegations “that the indorsements *350of said notes were obtained by certain…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Chester v. . the Bank of KingstonNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Catlin v. HansenThe Superior Court of New York City · 1852
- Sawyer v. ChambersNew York Supreme Court · 1865
- Hoxie v. GreeneNew York Supreme Court · 1869