Spence v. Simis

1 Misc. 384, 22 N.Y.S. 76, 49 N.Y. St. Rep. 636
CourtNew York City Court
DecidedDecember 15, 1892
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Misc. 384 (Spence v. Simis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York City Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Spence v. Simis, 1 Misc. 384, 22 N.Y.S. 76, 49 N.Y. St. Rep. 636 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1892).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff brought this action for goods sold and delivered, and it is conceded, that on the answer, he may be bound to prove each item of his account, which consists of twenty-three items. If the appellant had stipulated, on the motion for reference, to withdraw his claim on a quantum meruit and rely solely on the allegation of a promise to pay, no proof of the items would have been necessary. The plaintiff may not be able to prove the promise, and then can prove the items of the account. The order of reference was, therefore, properly made.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Misc. 384, 22 N.Y.S. 76, 49 N.Y. St. Rep. 636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spence-v-simis-nycityct-1892.