¶1Since notice was, given of the motion the plaintiff has served a sufficient bill of particulars. He has now confined his claim to the balance found in his favor on an account stated between the parties in 1839, which account consisted of five items for cash lent and advanced to the defendant; interest is also claimed, dates and sums are given with sufficient particularity. The motion is therefore denied .on the plaintiff’s paying $ 10 costs of the same. Rule accordingly.
1 How. Pr. 46
Rust v. Rowe
Decided December 15, 1844
New York Supreme Court · decided 1844-12-15
Motion by defendant for judgment of non pros, or discontinuance against the plaintiff for his neglect to comply with the peremptory order for further particulars.—It appears on the part of the defendant that this is an action of assumpsit. Plaintiff furnished bill of particulars about 9th May, 1844, for $861 due plaintiff as per account stated in gross, about the month of August, 1839, and interest thereon.
Decided 1844-12-15