Brewster v. Wooster
This text of 26 N.Y.S. 912 (Brewster v. Wooster) 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.
Opinion
The authorities on which the respondent relies-in support of the motion to dismiss the appeal all rest upon the proposition that a party cannot do any act inconsistent with his-appeal, and yet claim the benefit of the appeal. The case before us does not faff within the reason of this rule. Appellant’s plea in another action of the recovery of the judgment in question is not. [913]*913used as a weapon, but as a shield. It is based upon the maxim that no man should be twice impleaded for the same cause of action. It is a plea in bar, and not in estoppel. As a plea in bar it is not inconsistent with the prosecution of the appeal. The motion to dismiss the appeal should be denied, with $10 costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
26 N.Y.S. 912, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brewster-v-wooster-superctny-1893.