Ives v. Shaw

New York Supreme Court

Ives v. Shaw

31 How. Pr. 54

New York Supreme Court·Decided November 15, 1865·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Müllin, J.

The defendant was not entitled to a bill of particulars. The damages sought to be recovered under the first and second counts of tho complaint, are not matters of account within the meaning of the Code.. Nor is the defendant entitled to a bill under the third count, as that specifies particularly tho items sought to be recovered.

The motion is therefore denied, but without costs.. The plaintiffs to have twenty days further time in which to reply.

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

Müllin, J.

The defendant was not entitled to a bill of particulars. The damages sought to be recovered under the first and second counts of tho complaint, are not matters of account within the meaning of the Code.. Nor is the defendant entitled to a bill under the third count, as that specifies particularly tho items sought to be recovered.

The motion is therefore denied, but without costs.. The plaintiffs to have twenty days further time in which to reply.

Ives v. Shaw, 31 How. Pr. 54 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1865).

Pincite

31 How. Pr. 54 (Ives v. Shaw) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related