West v. Brewster
The Superior Court of New York City
This was a motion in the alternative that all proceedings should be quashed as irregular, or that the complaint should be made more definite and certain. The notice inserted in the summons was in the terms of subdivision 2, § 129 of the Code, that if the defendant should fail to answer the complaint within, &c., the plaintiff would apply to the court for the relief demanded.
Read the full summary
This was a motion in the alternative that all proceedings should be quashed as irregular, or that the complaint should be made more definite and certain. The notice inserted in the summons was in the terms of subdivision 2, § 129 of the Code, that if the defendant should fail to answer the complaint within, &c., the plaintiff would apply to the court for the relief demanded. The complaint stated in general terms that the defendant had been retained, by the plaintiff as his attorney in various suits and transactions,, and averred, upon information and belief,-that, as such attorney, he* had.…
1Opinion of the CourtOakley, C. J.
This is not an action “ arising on a contract for the recovery of money only,” within the meaning of sub. 1 in § 129 of the Code. The actions there referred to are actions at law, properly so called, in which, from the nature of the contract, the plaintiff knows, and can, therefore, specify the sum which he is entitled to recover. This is a suit in equity, arising from the particular relation of the parties; the contract which that relation implies is not for the payment of money only, and the relief which is sought, the compelling a confidential agent to render a proper account of the…
2Cited by5 opinions
- State v. Illinois Central RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1910
- San Pedro Lumber Co. v. ReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
- Tuttle v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1857
- Bates v. ReynoldsThe Superior Court of New York City · 1861
- Gordon v. GaffeyNew York Supreme Court · 1859