Howk v. Bishop
New York Supreme Court
Appeal from an order of Special Term denying a motion made by tbe defendant Bishop to set aside an execution. The action in which this judgment was entered was commenced upon a note made by the defendant Eckert to the order of the defendant Bishop for the sum of fifty-five dollars. The action was against Eckert, as maker, and Bishop, as indorser. Eckert defended and Bishop suffered default.
Read the full summary
Appeal from an order of Special Term denying a motion made by tbe defendant Bishop to set aside an execution. The action in which this judgment was entered was commenced upon a note made by the defendant Eckert to the order of the defendant Bishop for the sum of fifty-five dollars. The action was against Eckert, as maker, and Bishop, as indorser. Eckert defended and Bishop suffered default. It was. tried before a referee, who reported in favor of the plaintiff, and a judgment was accordingly entered June-18, 1878, for fifty-six dollars and seventy-nine cents damages and one hundred and…
1Opinion of the Court
Boardman, J.:
It is undoubtedly true that the General Term has power to reverse a judgment upon appeal as to one defendant and affirm it as to another. (Geraud v. Stagg, 10 How., 369; Story v. N. Y. and H. R. R. Co., 6 N. Y., 86, note; Code, § 366; Van Slyck v. Snell, 6 Lans., 299; Angell v. Cook, 2 T. & C., 175; 4 Wait’s Prac., 523.) But it does not follow that the power must be exercised because it exists. In the present case the judgment of $200.63 was, in fact, reversed by the General Term. Such reversal left no judgment against the defendants or either of them. A new trial was granted to…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Van Slyck v. SnellNew York Supreme Court · 1872