Wolfe v. Schmenger
This text of 9 N.Y. St. Rep. 516 (Wolfe v. Schmenger) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering City of New York Municipal Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
While not prepared to hold that the service of amended pleadings, pending an offer of judgment, must ipso facto and in all cases annul the offer of judgment, yet in the case at bar, the order should be reversed and the clerk’s taxation affirmed for the reason that the parties cannot be fairly presumed, to have intended or understood, that the offer of judgment upon certain specific claims, should hold good and apply to others, widely different, set forth in the amended complaint.
The order, therefore, should be reversed with the usual costs and disbursements, and the clerk’s taxation affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
9 N.Y. St. Rep. 516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wolfe-v-schmenger-nynyccityct-1887.