Legal Opinion

Wright v. Deering

New York Court of Common Pleas

Decided February 6, 1893PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from city court, general term. Action by John H. Wright against James A. Deering, executor of James Deering, deceased. From a judgment affirming a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

1Opinion of the CourtPryor, J.

Action on promissory notes by indorsee against maker. The complaint sets out the notes, alleges the making of them by the defendant, their transfer to the plaintiff, and his ownership of them; but omits an averment of nonpayment or of indebtedness upon the. notes. By motion at the trial to dismiss the complaint for defect in substance the defendant presented the point that it was insufficient for want of an allegation of nonpayment or present indebtedness; and so it was, beyond question. Tested by the general rule that a complaint must contain a statement of facts constituting a cause of…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lounsbury v. . PurdyNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
  2. Van Giesen v. . Van GiesenNew York Court of Appeals · 1852
  3. Broome v. . TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1879

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bush v. BushUtah Supreme Court · 1919
  2. Lafayette Trust Co. v. LacherAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1910
  3. Elkan v. EdwardsAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1908
  4. Gallway & Co. v. Golliek & Smith, Inc.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1913

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

Powered by the Exa API