30 N.Y.S. 1129

BARBER et al. v. RUTHERFORD et al.

(City Court of New York, General Term.

October 22, 1894.)

Action by Marshall Barber and Warren C=. Barber against Charles H. Rutherford and William E. Gray. Frorame Bros., for appellants. Cardoza & Nathan, for respondents.

EHRLICH, C. J.

The action is upon an undertaking executed by the defendants. The answer denies all the allegations of the complaint, except that the? defendants had executed a certain undertaking of the general description and character referred to in the complaint. The proceedings in the action in which the undertaking was given were all denied, so that: the affirmative of the issue was upon the plaintiffs, and it was properly accorded to them. The defense relied upon a counterclaim; but it appeared by the documentary evidence offered by the plaintiffs that the same matters pleaded had been adjudicated' adversely to the defendants’ assignors in a litigation ter* which they were privies, and they were therefore precluded thereby. Under these circumstances, the trial judge properly directed a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs; and, as there are no errors requiring a new trial, the judgment must be affirmed, with-costs.

Barber v. Rutherford
30 N.Y.S. 1129

Case Details

Name
Barber v. Rutherford
Decision Date
Oct 22, 1894
Citations

30 N.Y.S. 1129

Jurisdiction
New York

References

Referencing

Nothing yet... Still searching!

Referenced By

Nothing yet... Still searching!