McKeon v. Lane
The Superior Court of New York City
This was an action of debt upon the statute, [I R. L 524. Sec. 20.] against the defendant, to recover of him the penalty of fifty dollars, for not appearing as a witness in a certain cause in which the said Hugh McKeon was plaintiff, and one James Caherty was defendant.
Read the full summary
This was an action of debt upon the statute, [I R. L 524. Sec. 20.] against the defendant, to recover of him the penalty of fifty dollars, for not appearing as a witness in a certain cause in which the said Hugh McKeon was plaintiff, and one James Caherty was defendant. The declaration' averred, that on the first Monday of September, of the September term of this court, in the year 1829, the plaintiff impleaded one James Caherty in said court, in an action on the case on promises, and such proceedings were thereupon had, that upon issue joined, the said cause came on to be tried in its…
1Per curiam
Without going into any examination of the defendant’s pleas, we are compelled to decide this demurrer against the plaintiff. By the course of pleading adopted by himself, he has enabled the defendant to avoid a justification of the matter set up by him as a defence to the action, and go back to defects in the declaration. Upon a general demurrer, the rule is familiar, that the judgment must be against the party who commits the first fault, and here the plaintiff is in that predicament. He has not set forth enough to enable the court to judge whether the defendant was bound to appear at the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Courtney v. BakerNew York Supreme Court · 1846