Dickinson v. Vanderpoel
This text of 9 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 626 (Dickinson v. Vanderpoel) 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.
Opinion
This is an action brought by the plaintiff, who was, in form at least, the sole lessee of certain premises, to recover damages against the lessors, for placing a steam boiler under the premises leased to the plaintiff, whereby, as alleged, the plaintiff’s goods, in the store above, were injured and damaged by excessive heat. It appeared on the trial that the plaintiff had a partner in the business. The non-joinder of such partner was not, in any manner, disclosed by either the complaint or answer. The rule seems to be well settled, that when the defense of non-joinder of parties plaintiff exists, and is not disclosed by the complaint, it must be brought forward in the answer.
A new trial is ordered; costs to abide the event.
Present—Barnard, P. J., Talcott and Tappen, JJ.
New trial ordered, costs to abide event.
Bank of Havana v. Magee, Op. of Comstock, J., 20 N. Y., 362; Zabriskie v. Smith, 13 id., 322; Code, §§ 147, 148.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
9 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 626, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dickinson-v-vanderpoel-nysupct-1874.