Pracht v. Ritter

The Superior Court of New York City

Pracht v. Ritter

16 Jones & S. 509

CourtThe Superior Court of New York City

DecidedDecember 5, 1881

StatusPublished

This text of 16 Jones & S. 509 (Pracht v. Ritter) 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

Pracht v. Ritter, 16 Jones & S. 509 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1881).

Pincite

Opinion

The court at General Term held :

“ It seems to me that the amended complaint is de[510]*510murrable upon its face. It in the first place avers a complete cause of action against Ritter solely, and then another complete cause of action against Ritter and the defendant impleaded with him. Both causes of action are for damage from false representations. Section 484 Code of Civil Procedure enacts that all the causes of action united in a complaint shall, except as otherwise provided by law, affect all the parties. If it should be that the actions for damages of this kind are not specified in any of the subdivisions of the section, a similar result would flow from the common law rules of pleading. A court has not the discretion to allow a defective pleading to be served as an amendment of the earlier pleading.”

Yenni & Sawyer, for appellant. William M. Vanderzee, for respondent.

Opinion by Sedgwick, Ch. J.; Speir and Freedman, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed, and the motion made below denied, with $10 costs.

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

The court at General Term held :

“ It seems to me that the amended complaint is de[510]*510murrable upon its face. It in the first place avers a complete cause of action against Ritter solely, and then another complete cause of action against Ritter and the defendant impleaded with him. Both causes of action are for damage from false representations. Section 484 Code of Civil Procedure enacts that all the causes of action united in a complaint shall, except as otherwise provided by law, affect all the parties. If it should be that the actions for damages of this kind are not specified in any of the subdivisions of the section, a similar result would flow from the common law rules of pleading. A court has not the discretion to allow a defective pleading to be served as an amendment of the earlier pleading.”

Yenni & Sawyer, for appellant. William M. Vanderzee, for respondent.

Opinion by Sedgwick, Ch. J.; Speir and Freedman, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed, and the motion made below denied, with $10 costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 Jones & S. 509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pracht-v-ritter-nysuperctnyc-1881.