Fox v. Nellis
New York Supreme Court
This action was commenced in a justice’s court. The plaintiff recovered a judgment of $159.50 damages, and $2.80 costs. The defendant appealed from this judgment, to the county court of Montgomery county, under the provisions of section 311 of the Code, as amended in 1862, and specified, as therein required, five several particulars, in each of which he claimed that judgment should have been more favorable to him.
Read the full summary
This action was commenced in a justice’s court. The plaintiff recovered a judgment of $159.50 damages, and $2.80 costs. The defendant appealed from this judgment, to the county court of Montgomery county, under the provisions of section 311 of the Code, as amended in 1862, and specified, as therein required, five several particulars, in each of which he claimed that judgment should have been more favorable to him. All of said objections, except the fourth, related to the justice’s decisions on the trial, and these could be corrected in no way but by abandoning the judgment. The fourth…
1Opinion of the Court
Potter, Justice.
The provisions of section 371 of the Code, as amended in 1862, introduced an entirely new practice in regard to new trials allowed on appeals from justices’ courts to the county court. I am not aware that the section in question, in this respect, has had elsewhere judicial construction. By the provisions of this section, the party applying for a new trial is called upon to inform his adversary of the particular or particulars in which he claims that-the judgment should have been more favorable to him. This provision would appear to be a reasonable and wise enactment. It seems…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Wynkoop v. HalbutNew York Supreme Court · 1865
- Loomis v. HigbieNew York Supreme Court · 1865
- Gray v. HannahNew York Supreme Court · 1866
- Younghause v. FingarNew York Supreme Court · 1872