Rogers v. Kelsey

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Rogers v. Kelsey

105 N.Y.S. 119

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedJune 27, 1907

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 105 N.Y.S. 119 (Rogers v. Kelsey) 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

Rogers v. Kelsey, 105 N.Y.S. 119 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This action was brought to recover for labor performed and materials furnished, for which it was alleged that the defendant agreed to pay $230. The defendant set up a counterclaim for the damages he sustained by reason of the improper manner in which the work was done. We cannot find in the record that the [120]*120proof showed more than $87 damages on this account. The court awarded judgment for the defendant upon his counterclaim for $25.

To set off the full amount of the plaintiff’s claim and award judgment for $25 for the defendant, the court must llave allowed damages for the injury which the defendant claimed was done to the walls of the building where the work was performed. The allowance of damages on account of these injuries cannot properly be made in this action. It appeared upon the trial that the defendant was not the owner of the building. Whether he was the agent of the owner of the building or a tenant was not disclosed. It is an essential element of a counterclaim that the cause of action alleged must exist in favor of the defendant who pleads it. Code Civ. Proc. § 501; Mun. Ct. Act, Laws 1902, p. 1538, c. 580, § 151. This essential element was not shown to exist in this case, and the damages awarded the defendant upon his counterclaim were improperly allowed.

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

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

PER CURIAM.

This action was brought to recover for labor performed and materials furnished, for which it was alleged that the defendant agreed to pay $230. The defendant set up a counterclaim for the damages he sustained by reason of the improper manner in which the work was done. We cannot find in the record that the [120]*120proof showed more than $87 damages on this account. The court awarded judgment for the defendant upon his counterclaim for $25.

To set off the full amount of the plaintiff’s claim and award judgment for $25 for the defendant, the court must llave allowed damages for the injury which the defendant claimed was done to the walls of the building where the work was performed. The allowance of damages on account of these injuries cannot properly be made in this action. It appeared upon the trial that the defendant was not the owner of the building. Whether he was the agent of the owner of the building or a tenant was not disclosed. It is an essential element of a counterclaim that the cause of action alleged must exist in favor of the defendant who pleads it. Code Civ. Proc. § 501; Mun. Ct. Act, Laws 1902, p. 1538, c. 580, § 151. This essential element was not shown to exist in this case, and the damages awarded the defendant upon his counterclaim were improperly allowed.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

105 N.Y.S. 119, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rogers-v-kelsey-nyappterm-1907.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack