Ives v. Shaw
New York Supreme Court
The complaint in this action contained throe counts; the first of which alleges the mating of a special contract by which the defendant agreed to receive, till and pack for the plaintiffs certain beef or barreling cattle on a day named “ that acting upon the Said agreement, and in order to have their cattle ready at the yards of the defendant in Deerfield, as he had directed, on that day, the plaintiffs were put to great necessary expense and trouble in breaking roads and…
Read the full summary
The complaint in this action contained throe counts; the first of which alleges the mating of a special contract by which the defendant agreed to receive, till and pack for the plaintiffs certain beef or barreling cattle on a day named “ that acting upon the Said agreement, and in order to have their cattle ready at the yards of the defendant in Deerfield, as he had directed, on that day, the plaintiffs were put to great necessary expense and trouble in breaking roads and driving said cattle, and in caring for them; that they had the said cattle to the number of 181 head ready for the said…
1Opinion of the Court
Müllin, J.
The defendant was not entitled to a bill of particulars. The damages sought to be recovered under the first and second counts of tho complaint, are not matters of account within the meaning of the Code.. Nor is the defendant entitled to a bill under the third count, as that specifies particularly tho items sought to be recovered.
The motion is therefore denied, but without costs.. The plaintiffs to have twenty days further time in which to reply.
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hayden v. City of AstoriaOregon Supreme Court · 1917
- Stillwell v. HernandezNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1878