Dioyt v. Tanner

20 Wend. 190
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedOctober 15, 1838
StatusPublished

This text of 20 Wend. 190 (Dioyt v. Tanner) 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
Dioyt v. Tanner, 20 Wend. 190 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1838).

Opinion

By the Courts Nelson, Ch. J.

It is well settled that words not actionable in themselves may be laid in the same count with words actionable, and may be proved to show the quo animo or in aggravation of damages. It cannot, therefore, be permitted to the defendant to select the words not actionable and demur to them, taking issue upon the others. 6 Wendell, 407, 410. 3 Wilson, 185. 2 East. 438. 2 Saund. 307, n. 1, a. 1 Campb. 49, n. If the defendant insists that the words demurred to are actionable, then he must fail of course, as he should have included them in the plea of the general issue, or set up some other defence ; and this he should have done whether the words laid constituted a distinct cause of action or not.

There is nothing in the suggestion that the count contains a misjoinder of distinct causes of action ; the words relate to the same crime. 2 R. S. 674, § 39.

Judgment for plaintiff.

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

Related

Rathbun v. Emigh
6 Wend. 407 (New York Supreme Court, 1831)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 Wend. 190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dioyt-v-tanner-nysupct-1838.