Van Derwerken v. Polachek

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Van Derwerken v. Polachek

205 A.D. 847

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 15, 1923

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 205 A.D. 847 (Van Derwerken v. Polachek) 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

Van Derwerken v. Polachek, 205 A.D. 847 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The contract in suit called for the rendition of plaintiff’s erviees to the satisfaction of defendant. Plaintiff had to aver in his complaint, and prove on the trial, rendition of the services as called for by the contract, namely, to the satisfaction of defendant. A denial of the allegation of the complaint as to performance under the terms of the contract would allow defendant to offer evidence that the services were not satisfactory to him. The pleading of the same matter by way of defense was, therefore, unnecessary, and plaintiff is not entitled to particulars of a claim which he himself had to meet by evidence. (See Delano v. Columbia M. Works & M. Iron Co., 179 App. Div. 153; affd., on opinion below, 226 N. Y. 660; Fried v. Singer,-Mass.-; 136 N. E. Rep. 609.) Rich, Jaycox, Manning, Kelby and Young, JJ., concur. .

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

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. The contract in suit called for the rendition of plaintiff’s erviees to the satisfaction of defendant. Plaintiff had to aver in his complaint, and prove on the trial, rendition of the services as called for by the contract, namely, to the satisfaction of defendant. A denial of the allegation of the complaint as to performance under the terms of the contract would allow defendant to offer evidence that the services were not satisfactory to him. The pleading of the same matter by way of defense was, therefore, unnecessary, and plaintiff is not entitled to particulars of a claim which he himself had to meet by evidence. (See Delano v. Columbia M. Works & M. Iron Co., 179 App. Div. 153; affd., on opinion below, 226 N. Y. 660; Fried v. Singer,-Mass.-; 136 N. E. Rep. 609.) Rich, Jaycox, Manning, Kelby and Young, JJ., concur. .

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D. 847, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-derwerken-v-polachek-nyappdiv-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack