Booss v. Mihan

Superior Court of New York

Booss v. Mihan

24 N.Y.S. 112, 4 Misc. 614

CourtThe Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo

DecidedJuly 3, 1893

StatusPublished

This text of 24 N.Y.S. 112 (Booss v. Mihan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of the City of New York and Buffalo primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Booss v. Mihan, 24 N.Y.S. 112, 4 Misc. 614 (superctny 1893).

Pincite

Opinion

FREEDMAN, J.

Upon their complaint the plaintiffs seek to recover from the defendant the amount of certain overpayments made by the plaintiffs to the defendant on account of labor and services rendered, and obtained by the defendant by means of deceit and false and fraudulent representations. The cause of action thus set forth is not referable, and, that being so, the defendant’s answer cannot make it referable. Moreover, the reply shows that the counterclaim set up in the answer does not involve the examination of a long account.

The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

FREEDMAN, J.

Upon their complaint the plaintiffs seek to recover from the defendant the amount of certain overpayments made by the plaintiffs to the defendant on account of labor and services rendered, and obtained by the defendant by means of deceit and false and fraudulent representations. The cause of action thus set forth is not referable, and, that being so, the defendant’s answer cannot make it referable. Moreover, the reply shows that the counterclaim set up in the answer does not involve the examination of a long account.

The order should be affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 N.Y.S. 112, 4 Misc. 614, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/booss-v-mihan-superctny-1893.