TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Agate v. Richards

Joseph Agate, and v. James N. Richards, and

Agate v. Richards, 5 Bosw. 456 (1859)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
The Superior Court of New York City · State Trial Courts
Decided
December 10, 1859
Judges
Hoffman
Citations
5 Bosw. 456
Headnotes
1. Where, in an action on contract for the sale of goods, wares and merchandise, a former recovery upon the same cause of action in a suit between the same parties is set up as a defense; a record of a recovery in a former suit in favor of a plaintiff and against a defendant of the same names, where the complaint in each suit alleges, as the only cause of action stated, the sale of goods, wares and merchandise by the plaintiff to the defendant during periods ending on the same day, and claims the same sum to be due, íurnishes prima fade evidence of the truth of the defense. 2. Identity of names in connection with the same or the like subject matter is presumptive evidence of identity of person.
Summary
This is an appeal by James N. Richards, the defendant, from a-judgment, in favor of Joseph Agate the plaintiff, rendered on a trial had before Mr. Justice Pierrepoht, without a jury, June 27th, 1859. The summons is dated April 27th, 1858, and states that judg-' ment will be taken for $72.50, with interest from January 1st, 1858. The complaint alleges a sale for cash, of goods, wares and merchandise, by the plaintiff to the defendant, between the 23d of May, 1855, and the 25th of December, 1856, consisting of “ colored linen shirts, silk cravats, suspenders, &c.,” of the value of $72.50; that such sum is due with interest from the 1st of January, 1857, and prays judgment for that sum and such interest, with costs. The answer avers a former suit in this Court, by the plaintiff against the defendant, for the same cause of action, and a recovery by the plaintiff therein on the 29th of December, 1857, on said cause of action for $90.43 and that such judgment is in full force. At the trial, the defendant, to prove such defense, introduced the record of a judgment in this Court, in favor of Joseph Agate as plaintiff against James N. Richards as defendant. The summons in it was dated November 21st, 1857; was served on the 24th of said November, .and states that judgment will be taken for $72.50, with interest from the 1st of January, 1857. The complaint in it, states a sale by plaintiff to defendant of goods and merchandise, consisting “of shirts, hose, suspenders, &c.,” between the 9th of November, 1854, and the 24th of December, 1856, of the value of $122.50; that $72.50, with interest from January 1st, 1857, is due, and prays judgment for that sum and such interest, with costs. Judgment in it, was perfected, for want of an answer, December 29th, 1857, for amount claimed,.. $72 60 Interest,........................................ 4 83 Costs,.......................................... 13 00 Total,...................................... $90 43 The Judge held, that there was not sufficient proof given of the identity of the parties and of the cause of action in the two suits, and gave judgment for the plaintiff for $85.13, (the amount claimed, with interest;) the defendant excepted to the decision and appealed from the judgment.

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

Opinion of the Court — Hoffman

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

By the Court—Hoffman, J.

The defendant set up in his answer a former judgment recovered against him for the same demand by the same plaintiff. The whole question is as to the identity of person, and cause of action.

The parties, plaintiff and defendant, have the same names in each suit, and not names of very ordinary occurrence. The complaint in the first action asks for judgment in the sum of $72.50, with interest from the 1st of January, 1857. The complaint in the second action is in this respect the same. The summons in each action is, in this particular, also alike.

The complaint in the present suit states sales of linen shirts, silk cravats, suspenders, &c., between the 23d of May, 1855, and the 25th of December, 1856. The complaint, in the former action, states sales between the 9th of November, 1854; and the 24th of December, 1856, of shirts, hose, suspenders, &c., to the amount of $122.50, and then avers that the defendant remains indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of $72.50,-with interest from the 1st January, 1857, on account of said goods and merchandise.

We think that there was enough presented to raise a presumption of identity and support the answer. The plaintiff should have been driven to repel this presumption. (18 N. Y. R., 89.)

Judgment reversed, new trial ordered, costs to abide event.

How later courts describe this case

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

1865–1866: 11889–1890: 11891–1892: 118652026peak 1865 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Day v. Vallette25 Ind. 42 (1865)
  2. Brown v. Sullivan20 N.Y.S. 634 (1892)
  3. Fink v. Manhattan Railway Co.8 N.Y.S. 327 (1890)

Most recent

  1. Brown v. Sullivan20 N.Y.S. 634 (1892)
  2. Fink v. Manhattan Railway Co.8 N.Y.S. 327 (1890)
  3. Day v. Vallette25 Ind. 42 (1865)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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