Dress v. Rosen

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Dress v. Rosen

84 N.Y.S. 174

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 22, 1903

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 84 N.Y.S. 174 (Dress v. Rosen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Dress v. Rosen, 84 N.Y.S. 174 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1903).

Pincite

Opinion

MacLEAN, J.

In an action for goods sold and delivered, the defendant set up two defenses—a general denial and payment. To prove the latter, he offered in evidence checks for a larger amount than the whole bill of the plaintiffs, who, in rebuttal, showed prior transactions, and claimed that the checks of the defendant were given in payment of them. The defendant appeals upon his objections, taken with exceptions, that it was improper to receive evidence of sales not within the pleadings, to amend which accordingly no motion was made. The propriety of the testimony given as to anterior transactions is apparent upon inspection of the checks put in evidence by the defendant himself. The judgment should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to the respondents. All concur.

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

MacLEAN, J.

In an action for goods sold and delivered, the defendant set up two defenses—a general denial and payment. To prove the latter, he offered in evidence checks for a larger amount than the whole bill of the plaintiffs, who, in rebuttal, showed prior transactions, and claimed that the checks of the defendant were given in payment of them. The defendant appeals upon his objections, taken with exceptions, that it was improper to receive evidence of sales not within the pleadings, to amend which accordingly no motion was made. The propriety of the testimony given as to anterior transactions is apparent upon inspection of the checks put in evidence by the defendant himself. The judgment should be affirmed.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to the respondents. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

84 N.Y.S. 174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dress-v-rosen-nyappterm-1903.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack