Cowen Co. v. Houck Mfg. Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Action by the Cowen Company against the Houck Manufacturing Company, Incorporated. Plaintiff brought error to judgment on a verdict for much less than was sued for. Plaintiff here and below sued to recover the asserted cost and value of doing certain advertising for defendant.
Read the full summary
In Error to the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York. Action by the Cowen Company against the Houck Manufacturing Company, Incorporated. Plaintiff brought error to judgment on a verdict for much less than was sued for. Plaintiff here and below sued to recover the asserted cost and value of doing certain advertising for defendant. The complaint set forth what plaintiff had expended on said advertising, averred that defendant had agreed to pay the same, plus 15 per cent., and demanded judgment accordingly. The answer was a general denial, coupled with a…
1Opinion of the CourtHough, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). [1, 2] It cannot be doubted that what determines the position of the burden of proof is the answer to the question, “Who has the affirmative of the issue?” But to reconcile all the rulings made after admitting this principle would be quite impossible. An issue is “a single, certain, and material point, arising out of the allegations of the parties, and generally should be made up by an affirmative and negative.” Sitnonton v. Winter, 5 Pet. 148, 8 L. Ed. 75. Allegations are usually made in written pleadings; therefore the affirmative of the issue is normally…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Heinemann v. . HeardNew York Court of Appeals · 1875
- Simonton v. WinterSupreme Court of the United States · 1831
- Denney v. StoutNebraska Supreme Court · 1900
- Small v. ClewleySupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1873
- Anderson v. English & WebbSupreme Court of Alabama · 1898
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- First National Bank v. FordWyoming Supreme Court · 1923
- In re Locust Bldg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
- Imhoff v. WalkerDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1947
- Ottawa Transit Co. v. 261,000 Bushels of WheatDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 1919
- Houk Mfg. Co. v. Cowen Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.