Bowery Bank v. Martin

16 N.Y.S. 73, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 646, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 317
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 16, 1891
StatusPublished

This text of 16 N.Y.S. 73 (Bowery Bank v. Martin) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bowery Bank v. Martin, 16 N.Y.S. 73, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 646, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 317 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1891).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this action the complaint demands judgment for a sum money only. case of Glenn v. Lancaster, 109 N. Y. 641, 16 N. H. Rep. 484, the court state that section 968 provides that every issue of [74]*74•fact must be tried by a jury unless a jury trial is waived, or a reference directed, “in an action in which the complaint demands judgment for a sum of money only.”1 We know of no exception that can be ingrafted upon this provision. While, in equity actions, relief may sometimes be granted by judgments for money only, yet, where that is the only relief demanded, and no other relief sought, the case is brought within the section, and the action must be tried before a jury. This decision covers the case at bar, and is controlling upon us, the complaint in this action demanding judgment for a sum of money only. The order should therefore be reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, to abide the event, and the case remitted to the circuit. All concur.

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

Related

Glenn v. . Lancaster
16 N.E. 534 (New York Court of Appeals, 1888)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
16 N.Y.S. 73, 40 N.Y. St. Rep. 646, 1891 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 317, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bowery-bank-v-martin-nysupct-1891.