Myers v. McCarthy
The Superior Court of New York City
This was an appeal from a judgment of the assistant justices’ court. McCarthy sued Myers in the court below, for wages due for the work and labor of his son. The pleadings were a complaint, answer and reply. The plaintiff proved the amount of labor performed, and the value thereof, and rested his case. The defence was, that the demand in suit had been settled by the giving of Myers’ note for the amount, at ninety days, and the acceptance thereof by McCarthy, the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
This was an appeal from a judgment of the assistant justices’ court. McCarthy sued Myers in the court below, for wages due for the work and labor of his son. The pleadings were a complaint, answer and reply. The plaintiff proved the amount of labor performed, and the value thereof, and rested his case. The defence was, that the demand in suit had been settled by the giving of Myers’ note for the amount, at ninety days, and the acceptance thereof by McCarthy, the plaintiff. For this purpose, Henry D. Sharrat was examined as a witness, who testified that in June, 1848, he was a clerk for a…
1Opinion of the CourtBy the Court. Vanderpoel, J.
The 349th section of the Code of Procedure provides, that “ A party examined by an adverse party may be examined on his own behalf in respect to any matter pertinent to the issue. But if he testifies to any new matter, not responsive to the inquiries put to him by the adverse party, such adverse party may offer himself as a witness in his own behalf.”
In this case, the question whether Van Hovenburgh, or his clerk, was authorized to take the note of the defendant below, was a material one. The defendant, under the above section of the code, called the plaintiff below, and asked him whether he…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Milward v. HallettNew York Supreme Court · 1804