H. M. Rogers & Co. v. Emilio

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

H. M. Rogers & Co. v. Emilio

114 N.Y.S. 111

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJanuary 8, 1909

StatusPublished

This text of 114 N.Y.S. 111 (H. M. Rogers & Co. v. Emilio) 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

H. M. Rogers & Co. v. Emilio, 114 N.Y.S. 111 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1909).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff sued to recover $197.91 for fish sold and delivered to defendants. The latter admitted plaintiff’s claim, but counterclaimed $408 for breach of contract on failure to deliver the fish. The court allowed both claims, and, deducting the plaintiff’s claim from defendants’ counterclaim, gave judgment for the difference, with costs in favor of defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

There is sufficient evidence to sustain the counterclaim, but the court made an error in calculation. The plaintiff’s claim is $197.91 damages and $4.96 interest due on the claim, making $202.87. The defendants’ counterclaim is $408. Deducting the first sum from the latter, we have $205.13 damages, whereas the court allowed $294.61 as damages and $20 costs.

The amount of the judgment must be reduced accordingly, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff sued to recover $197.91 for fish sold and delivered to defendants. The latter admitted plaintiff’s claim, but counterclaimed $408 for breach of contract on failure to deliver the fish. The court allowed both claims, and, deducting the plaintiff’s claim from defendants’ counterclaim, gave judgment for the difference, with costs in favor of defendant. Plaintiff appeals.

There is sufficient evidence to sustain the counterclaim, but the court made an error in calculation. The plaintiff’s claim is $197.91 damages and $4.96 interest due on the claim, making $202.87. The defendants’ counterclaim is $408. Deducting the first sum from the latter, we have $205.13 damages, whereas the court allowed $294.61 as damages and $20 costs.

The amount of the judgment must be reduced accordingly, and, as modified, affirmed, without costs of this appeal to either party.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 N.Y.S. 111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/h-m-rogers-co-v-emilio-nyappterm-1909.