TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Kelsey v. Sargent

Edward J. Kelsey, Respondent, v. James Sargent, Appellant

Kelsey v. Sargent, 3 N.E. 795 (N.Y. 1885)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Court of Appeals · State Highest Courts
Decided
December 8, 1885
Judges
<italic>Per Curiam</italic>.
Citations
3 N.E. 795100 N.Y. 60255 Sickels 6021885 N.Y. LEXIS 1019
Headnotes
A defendant may be required to serve a bill of particulars as to matter set forth i'n his answer, which is effectual only as a defense, as well as to matter set up as a counter-claim. Where the matter is left uncertain, by reason of general averments, it is for the court below to determine whether further information required by plaintiff shall be given by a more specific answer or by a bill of particulars, and its determination is not re viewable here.
Summary
Appeal from order of the General Term of the Supreme Court, in the fourth judicial department, made April 23, 1885, which affirmed an order of Special Term, requiring defendant to serve a bill of particulars. This action was brought to- compel the surrender of certain stock which the complaint alleged had been pledged by plaintiff to defendant as security for the payment of a promissory note, and also to save defendant harmless from certain guaranties executed by him. The complaint alleged payment of the note and upon information and belief that defendant “ was made free and discharged from all his contracts as guarantor.” The answer denied said averment and alleged “ that the defendant has not been released from liability on said guaranties and is still liable on three or more of such guaranties.” The order appealed from requires defendant to serve “a bill of particulars of the guaranties upon which he claims to be liable as alleged in the answer.” The plaintiff cannot require the defendant to furnish a bill of particulars of his denial. (Code, § 531.) The order appealed from is not re viewable in this court. (Code of Civ. Pro., § 190; Hilton v. Beecher, 59 N. Y. 176 ; Dwight v. Germania Life Ins. Co., 84 id. 493; Witkowski v. Paramore, 93 id. 467.)

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Per Curiam.

If the answer is true the plaintiff will be defeated, because the defendant remains liable as guarantor upon certain obligations referred to in that pleading, but not described. It can make no difference whether the matter is left uncertain by general averments constituting an adverse claim, or by allegations of matter effectual only as a defense. In either case the plaintiff might require further information before trial, and whether it should be obtained from a more specific answer, or a bill of particulars, was for the Supreme Court to determine.

(Witkowski v. Paramore, 93 N. Y. 467 .)

It follows that the appeal should be dismissed.

All concur.

Appeal dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 10 cases

View all citing references →
1888: 21889: 11893: 11911: 11912: 11914: 11916: 11935: 11956: 118882026peak 1888 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. In re the Estate of Herle157 Misc. 352 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1935)
  2. In re the Estate of Kuster12 Misc. 2d 239 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1956)
  3. People v. Gilbert35 N.Y. Crim. 19 (1916)
  4. Brewery v. Sieke146 A.D. 467 (1911)
  5. Capel v. Lyons22 N.Y.S. 378 (1893)
  6. People v. Gilbert118 Misc. 825 (1914)

Most recent

  1. In re the Estate of Kuster12 Misc. 2d 239 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1956)
  2. In re the Estate of Herle157 Misc. 352 (N.Y. Sur. Ct. 1935)
  3. People v. Gilbert35 N.Y. Crim. 19 (1916)
  4. People v. Gilbert118 Misc. 825 (1914)
  5. Posner v. Rosenberg149 A.D. 270 (1912)
  6. Brewery v. Sieke146 A.D. 467 (1911)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Witkowski v. Paramore, 93 N.Y. 467 (1883) 14

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list