Salvage v. Hartley Silk Manufacturing Co.

153 A.D. 736, 138 N.Y.S. 800, 1912 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9351
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 13, 1912
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 153 A.D. 736 (Salvage v. Hartley Silk Manufacturing Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Salvage v. Hartley Silk Manufacturing Co., 153 A.D. 736, 138 N.Y.S. 800, 1912 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9351 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1912).

Opinion

Dowling, J.:

This action was brought to recover the value of certain yarn sold , and delivered by plaintiff to defendant. An answer was interposed wherein, after a general denial, a counterclaim was set up for damages claimed to have been sustained by the breach of a contract between defendant and one Sidney Thompson, on whose account the sales in question had been made by plaintiff. Plaintiff seeks to serve an amended complaint setting up as a second cause of action an account stated between himself and defendant, the amount whereof is exactly the same as that claimed under the first cause of action. We see no reason why the relief desired should not have been granted upon proper terms. Plaintiff could have discontinued his. pending action, upon payment of costs, and sued anew upon the cause of action he now seeks to introduce in his amended complaint. Ho greater hardship is entailed upon defendant by permitting the amendment than would have been caused by the course indicated. The fact that a witness has left defendant’s employ and it will take some time to locate him would be equally embarrassing in either event.

[737]*737The order appealed from will be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements to appellant, and the motion for leave to serve an amended complaint granted, on payment hy plaintiff to defendant of the taxable costs of the action down to the time of making such application.

Ingraham, P. J., McLaughlin, Clarke and Scott, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted on terms stated in opinion. Order to be settled on notice.

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

Related

Salvage v. Hartley Silk Mfg. Co.
139 N.Y.S. 1143 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
153 A.D. 736, 138 N.Y.S. 800, 1912 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salvage-v-hartley-silk-manufacturing-co-nyappdiv-1912.