Reimer v. Doerge
New York Marine Court
This action was brought against the defendants as sureties upon an undertaking on appeal from the special to the general term of the court of common pleas. The appeal was dismissed on the 2d of Hay, 1881, and according to the terms of the undertaking the liability of the sureties became fixed.
Read the full summary
This action was brought against the defendants as sureties upon an undertaking on appeal from the special to the general term of the court of common pleas. The appeal was dismissed on the 2d of Hay, 1881, and according to the terms of the undertaking the liability of the sureties became fixed. On the same day an execution upon the judgment was issued, which the defendant therein satisfied by paying the same to the sheriff on the 18th of Hay, 1881. Four days prior to such payment this action was commenced, and the defendant pleaded as a defense the payment of the judgment.debt to the sheriff.…
1Opinion of the CourtMcAdam, J.
There are authorities holding that a defendant may set up in his answer any matter arising before it is put in, whether it occurred after suit brought or not ( Willis agt. Clipp, 9 How. Pr., 568; Carpenter agt. Bell, 19 Abb. Pr., 263; Bennett agt. Annesly, 27 How. Pr., 184; Beebe agt. Dowd, 22 Barb., 255). That although not a plea in bar, it is an answer to the further1 maintenance of the suit, and, if true and sufficient, is equally effective in preventing a recovery (Carpenter agt. Bell, supra). The plaintiff cannot now object to the regularity of the plea, after having accepted it by going *144…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Beebe v. DowdNew York Supreme Court · 1856
- Carpenter v. BellThe Superior Court of New York City · 1863
- Willis v. ChippNew York Supreme Court · 1854
3Cited by2 opinions
- Smith v. BaumCity of New York Municipal Court · 1884
- Gallison & Hobron Co. v. RawakCity of New York Municipal Court · 1889