Ryckman v. Haight
New York Supreme Court
THIS was an action of assumpsit, for work and labour, and materials found, and goods sold and delivered, and the declaration also contained the usual money counts.
1Per curiam
The practice of this court Is merely to compel the plaintiff to specify the particulars of his demand. We consider thé bill of particulars as an amplification of the counts in. the declaration. The defendant must know, as well' as the plaintiffs, whát sums he hás paid, and *223if he is furnished with the debit side of the account, he can readily ascertain the balance claimed.
The defendant must take his rulé, that the plaintiffs furnish a bill of the particulars of their demand, exclusive of credits for payments by the defendant, in ten days, or that a judgment of nonpros be entered.
Rule…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Case v. . PharisNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- Williams v. AllenNew York Supreme Court · 1827
- Brewster v. SackettNew York Supreme Court · 1823
- Auzerais v. NagleeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
- Ball v. Evening Post Publishing Co.New York Supreme Court · 1888
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.