Hebberd v. Lee

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Hebberd v. Lee

112 N.Y.S. 1059

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedNovember 24, 1908

StatusPublished

This text of 112 N.Y.S. 1059 (Hebberd v. Lee) 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

Hebberd v. Lee, 112 N.Y.S. 1059 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

SEABURY, J.

This action is brought upon an undertaking given in a proceeding in a magistrate’s court, requiring the defendant McArthur to pay the sum of $10 a week to his wife for her support. The defendant Dee was surety upon this undertaking. Upon the trial the plaintiff proved that the defendant McArthur defaulted in the payment of the sum of $80, but failed to prove that McArthur’s wife had, in fact, become a charge upon the public treasury. Upon the failure of the plaintiff to prove this fact, the complaint should have been dismissed. The case of Goetting v. Normoyle, 191 N. Y. 368, 84 N. E. 287, is decisive of the question now presented, and renders further discussion unnecessary.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

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

SEABURY, J.

This action is brought upon an undertaking given in a proceeding in a magistrate’s court, requiring the defendant McArthur to pay the sum of $10 a week to his wife for her support. The defendant Dee was surety upon this undertaking. Upon the trial the plaintiff proved that the defendant McArthur defaulted in the payment of the sum of $80, but failed to prove that McArthur’s wife had, in fact, become a charge upon the public treasury. Upon the failure of the plaintiff to prove this fact, the complaint should have been dismissed. The case of Goetting v. Normoyle, 191 N. Y. 368, 84 N. E. 287, is decisive of the question now presented, and renders further discussion unnecessary.

The judgment should be reversed, and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 N.Y.S. 1059, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hebberd-v-lee-nyappterm-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack