Sherman v. Brantley

The Superior Court of New York City

Sherman v. Brantley

7 Rob. 55

CourtThe Superior Court of New York City

DecidedJanuary 15, 1868

StatusPublished

This text of 7 Rob. 55 (Sherman v. Brantley) 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

Sherman v. Brantley, 7 Rob. 55 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1868).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court, Robertson, Ch. J.

The action in this case is not on contract, but for damages for the tort of the defendant in fraudulently misrepresenting the responsi[57]*57bility of one J. N. Land, whereby the plaintiffs were induced to sell him merchandise. The allegation in one of the affidavits on which the order of arrest was issued, that the defendant is a non-resident, is not denied. I therefore cannot perceive upon what ground the order of arrest was vacated, as it certainly was properly granted, under the first subdivision of section 179 of the Code.

The order appealed from must be reversed, without costs.

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

By the Court, Robertson, Ch. J.

The action in this case is not on contract, but for damages for the tort of the defendant in fraudulently misrepresenting the responsi[57]*57bility of one J. N. Land, whereby the plaintiffs were induced to sell him merchandise. The allegation in one of the affidavits on which the order of arrest was issued, that the defendant is a non-resident, is not denied. I therefore cannot perceive upon what ground the order of arrest was vacated, as it certainly was properly granted, under the first subdivision of section 179 of the Code.

The order appealed from must be reversed, without costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Rob. 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sherman-v-brantley-nysuperctnyc-1868.