Devlin v. Mayor of New York
New York Court of Common Pleas
The action was brought by the plaintiff to recover the sum of one hundred thousand dollars damages for breaches upon the part of the city, of what is commonly called the “Hackley Contract,” an interest in which had been assigned to him.
Read the full summary
The action was brought by the plaintiff to recover the sum of one hundred thousand dollars damages for breaches upon the part of the city, of what is commonly called the “Hackley Contract,” an interest in which had been assigned to him. The defendants, Anthony S. Hope, Thomas Hope, Samuel Donaldson, Tilly R. Pratt, and Charles D. Blish, were also assignees of interests in said contract, and were made parties defendants, upon the allegation that they refused to be made parties plaintiff. • The city of Hew York put it a general denial; and the other defendants put in answers claiming different…
1Opinion of the CourtVan Brunt, J.
This motion can be conveniently divided into three branches :
1st. The motion of the plaintiff for an extra allowance based upon his recovery.
*342nd. The motion of the defendants for an extra allowance based upon their recovery.
3rd. The motion for an allowance based upon the defeat of the counter-claim of the city. It does not require any argument to show that the plaintiff is entitled to an allowance upon the amount of the recovery had by him. The case was certainly difficult and extraordinary within the meaning of section 309 of the Code of Procedure.
The motion of the defendants for an extra…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Burke v. CandeeNew York Supreme Court · 1872
3Cited by3 opinions
- Andrada v. KelseyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
- Russell v. . HarttNew York Court of Appeals · 1881
- Melcher v. StevensNew York Surrogate's Court · 1882