Stone v. Case
New York Supreme Court
Error from the Monroe common pleas. Stone sued Case and Keeler in a justice’s court, and declared orally , in substance, as follows: “ The plaintiff declares against the defendants in this suit in assumpsit, for that in consideration of a certain piece or peices of wheat the defendants agreed and promised to pay the plaintiff a certain sum of money, to wit, twenty dollars.
Read the full summary
Error from the Monroe common pleas. Stone sued Case and Keeler in a justice’s court, and declared orally , in substance, as follows: “ The plaintiff declares against the defendants in this suit in assumpsit, for that in consideration of a certain piece or peices of wheat the defendants agreed and promised to pay the plaintiff a certain sum of money, to wit, twenty dollars. Also, in consideration of the plaintiff’s interest in and to a certain piece or pieces of wheat, the defendants agreed and promised to pay the plaintiff another sum of money, to .wit; twenty dollars. And also,” &c. setting…
1Opinion of the Court
By the court,
Savage, Ch. J.
The counsel for the plaintiff in error contends that the declaration was sufficient. In Timmerman v. Morison. 14 Johns. R. 369, the plaintiff declared in writing :• his declaration containing the general counts, but without stating any time, or averring a request on the part of the defendant. The defendant demurred specially, but the justice decided the declaration was sufficient. On certiorari, this court said that the demurrer was well taken, and the defendant was entitled to judgment thereon. In Keyser v. Shafer, 2 Cowen, 437, such a declaration was held good in…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Crolot v. MaloyNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1882
- State Board of Pharmacy v. DaveyAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1907
- Halloran v. Coney Island Jockey ClubCity of New York Municipal Court · 1902
- Samuelson v. MayerAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1909