Conklin v. Cooper

12 N.Y. St. Rep. 632
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 13, 1887
StatusPublished

This text of 12 N.Y. St. Rep. 632 (Conklin v. Cooper) 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
Conklin v. Cooper, 12 N.Y. St. Rep. 632 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1887).

Opinion

Pratt, J.

We do not think the evidence sustains the finding that the tenant was responsible for the entire loss-of four cows. If they died from natural causes, without the tenant’s fault, the loss would fall upon the landlord. The burden of proof is upon the plaintiff. We do not think he meets the requirement.

The judgment should be modified by striking out sixty dollars allowed as value of two lost cows.

In other respects we do. not feel called upon to interfere with the judgment. The testimony was very conflicting and the trial judge saw the witnesses. The testimony of the numerous witnesses that plaintiff offered fifty dollars-[633]*633to William. Carroll, to take his brother’s place, is as consistent with a project of a sub-lease as with any other theory.

A sub-lease would not discharge the surety.

As modified by striking out the sixty dollars allowed for two of the cows, the judgment should be affirmed, without costs of appeal.

Dykman, J., concurs; Barnard, P. J., not sitting.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
12 N.Y. St. Rep. 632, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/conklin-v-cooper-nysupct-1887.