Forsyth v. John & James Edminston
The Superior Court of New York City
The defendants move for an order, requiring the plaintiff to so amend his complaint as to make it more definite and certain, and so as to state separately the causes of action contained in it, and to plainly number them, and for other relief. The plaintiff insists that it contains but a single cause of action, and that it is an action on the case, in the nature of conspiracy.
Read the full summary
The defendants move for an order, requiring the plaintiff to so amend his complaint as to make it more definite and certain, and so as to state separately the causes of action contained in it, and to plainly number them, and for other relief. The plaintiff insists that it contains but a single cause of action, and that it is an action on the case, in the nature of conspiracy. The complaint states, that on and prior to the 9th of August, 1855, the plaintiff was, and since has been, a merchant in New-York city, in good credit and solvent; that a dispute existed between the parties in respect to…
1Opinion of the Court
Bosworth, Justice.
The rules applicable to a writ of conspiracy, properly so called, are not applicable to actions on the case, in nature of a conspiracy. The latter are actions of tortt and are controlled by the general principles which regulate all actions of tort brought to recover damages. The damage sustained by the plaintiff is the ground of the action, and not the conspiracy. It may be brought against one person alone. If brought against several, all but one may be acquitted, and the plaintiff may have a verdict against one only.
*411When several conspire, and agree upon measures to be…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tappan v. PowersThe Superior Court of New York City · 1829
3Cited by2 opinions
- Keit v. WymanNew York Supreme Court · 1893
- Pierce v. BicknellSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873