Kirkland v. Moss

11 Abb. N. Cas. 421
CourtThe Superior Court of New York City
DecidedNovember 15, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 11 Abb. N. Cas. 421 (Kirkland v. Moss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering The Superior Court of New York City primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Kirkland v. Moss, 11 Abb. N. Cas. 421 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1882).

Opinion

Truax, J.

The plaintiff seeks to examine the defendant for the purpose of showing that he, the defendant, acted as principal, and not as the agent of one Wallack, as alleged by the defendant in his answer. The allegation in the moving papers, is that the “ plaintiffs desire to examine the defendant to prove that he had an agreement with the proprietor of the said premises .... by which he had full power and [422]*422authority to make the contract alleged in the complaint on his sole responsibility, and by which he had an interest in the said premises.” This allegation is not sufficient. There is no allegation that there was any such agreement. The moving affidavit simply alleges that the plaintiffs desire to prove there was such an agreement, which means they desire to prove their case if they can.

Order vacated, with costs.

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

Related

Learned v. Mayor of New York
21 Misc. 601 (New York Supreme Court, 1897)
Talbot v. Doran & Wright Co.
9 N.Y.S. 478 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1890)
Bandmann v. Jones
7 N.Y.S. 577 (New York Supreme Court, 1889)
Fluchtwanger v. Dessar
1 Silv. Sup. 1 (New York Supreme Court, 1889)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
11 Abb. N. Cas. 421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kirkland-v-moss-nysuperctnyc-1882.