Franken v. McAlpin
City of New York Municipal Court
Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the City Court of the city of Hew York, entered on a verdict for the plaintiff and from an order denying a motion for new trial. The action was for services alleged to have been rendered in the political campaign of the fall of 1898. The defendant was an unincorporated association, consisting of more than seven members, and was sued by its treasurer.
1Opinion of the Court
Eitzsimons, Oh. J.
We think the procedure, as to parties defendant, appropriate. Code, § 1919; Winter v. Hamm, 5 Civ. Pro. 194; McKane v. Democratic General Committee, 21 Abb. N. C. 89, and kindred cases.
The amendment allowed, at folio 76 of the case, was in furtherance of justice (Code, § 723), and did not substantially change the plaintiff’s claim. The defendant asserted but did not prove surprise. Code, § 539.
The evidence in, at the conclusion of the trial, presented a conflict of evidence. At all events, no motion was then made to dis*772miss the complaint, and the defendant, by the conduct of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Pollock v. . Pennsylvania Iron Works CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Henry Hess & Co. v. BaarNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1895
- McKane v. AdamsNew York Supreme Court · 1888