Legal Opinion

R. E. Dietz & Co. v. Miller, Sears & Walling Co.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided November 6, 1903PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Eleventh District.- Action by R. E. Dietz & Co. against Miller, Sears & Walling Company. From a judgment for plaintiffs, and from an order denying a motion to amend the judgment, defendant appeals." Reversed.

1Per curiam

In no aspect of the proof can the state of the account between the parties be made to result in the amount for which judgment was rendered, and the question is substantial, because of the offer of judgment, and the consequent difference in costs which must follow from an error in the computation. The justice’s indorsement on the summons shows that the offer of judgment was made, and, if there be any question of its form, that question should be presented by the return,.if we are to pass upon it. The filing of an offer is indicated of record, and, the paper not being annexed to the "return, we…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. R. E. Dietz Co. v. Miller, Sears & Walling Co.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1904

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API