Mendoza v. Steimer
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York
Appeal from Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Sixth District. Action by Henry Mendoza against Joseph Steimer. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
1Per curiam
The appellant’s chief grievance appears to be that he was not permitted to show that the money bet belonged to one DeLacy, and not to plaintiff, and therefore that the plaintiff was not the real party in interest. No such plea is contained in the answer, and the evidence was not competent under a general denial. Smith v. Hall, 67 N. Y. 50; Spooner v. D„ L. & W. R. R. Co., 115 N. Y. 22, 21 N. E. 696. In other respects the case is not to be distinguished from Mendoza v. Rose, 44 Misc. Rep. 241, 88 N. Y. Supp. 938.
Judgment should be affirmed, with costs.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Smith v. . HallNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Spooner v. D., L. & West. RailroadNew York Court of Appeals · 1889
- Mendoza v. RoseAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1904