Scheurer v. Monash

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Scheurer v. Monash

76 N.Y.S. 917

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedMarch 15, 1902

StatusPublished

This text of 76 N.Y.S. 917 (Scheurer v. Monash) 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

Scheurer v. Monash, 76 N.Y.S. 917 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

GIEGERICH, J.

The counterclaim was founded upon an entire contract for a year’s service, and proceeded upon allegations of performance. At the trial, the defendant moved to amend the answer by setting up a waiver of full performance, but, not being satisfied with the terms imposed for the amendment, he abandoned his motion, and proved performance only to the extent of io months, with a waiver by the plaintiffs of continued performance. Under the well-settled rule that an allegation of performance is not supported by proof of an excuse for nonperformance, the motion to dis[918]*918miss the counterclaim for a variance between the pleadings and the proof should have been granted. Schnaier v. Nathan, 31 App. Div. 225, 52 N. Y. Supp. 812; Gatling v. Central Spar Verein, 67 App. Div. 50, 73 N. Y. Supp. 496. The plaintiffs’ insistence that the trial be confined to the issues raised by the pleadings is disclosed by the objections taken to the admission of evidencé of facts not within the counterclaim, as alleged, and for the error noted the judgment is well assailed. The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide the event.

Judgment reversed and new .trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide event. All concur.

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

GIEGERICH, J.

The counterclaim was founded upon an entire contract for a year’s service, and proceeded upon allegations of performance. At the trial, the defendant moved to amend the answer by setting up a waiver of full performance, but, not being satisfied with the terms imposed for the amendment, he abandoned his motion, and proved performance only to the extent of io months, with a waiver by the plaintiffs of continued performance. Under the well-settled rule that an allegation of performance is not supported by proof of an excuse for nonperformance, the motion to dis[918]*918miss the counterclaim for a variance between the pleadings and the proof should have been granted. Schnaier v. Nathan, 31 App. Div. 225, 52 N. Y. Supp. 812; Gatling v. Central Spar Verein, 67 App. Div. 50, 73 N. Y. Supp. 496. The plaintiffs’ insistence that the trial be confined to the issues raised by the pleadings is disclosed by the objections taken to the admission of evidencé of facts not within the counterclaim, as alleged, and for the error noted the judgment is well assailed. The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide the event.

Judgment reversed and new .trial ordered, with costs to appellants to abide event. All concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

76 N.Y.S. 917, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scheurer-v-monash-nyappterm-1902.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack