Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

10 Wend. 258

Benson v. Brown

New York Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1833

New York Supreme Court · decided 1833-05-15

Error from the Madison common pleas. In 1830 Benson sued Brown and 23 others in a justice’s court, and declared in writing for work done and performed at their request, and attached to his declaration an account, which he called a bill of particulars, headed thus : “ Nathan Brown and others, of the Pilot Line Boats, To Harry Benson, Dr.” giving the items of his demand, consisting of blacksmith work done at various times between the 12th April and 27t.h October, in the year…

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently May 1827

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1833-05-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

¶2All the charges in the bill of particulars were for work, labor and services in 1824, before the company changed its name; specific dates were given for the items, and they were all in that year. It appeared therefore, on the face of the bill, that the association, as it existed in 1824, was intended to be charged, and the misdescription of the name or style of the association at the head of the bill could not have misled or deceived the defendants. This was a mere voluntary association, not an incorporated company ; they were sued as partners, and the bill of particulars was a bill in that cause—a bill against the individuals sued. It was not necessary that the bill should have any caption at all; it is no part of it, and may be entirely rejected. The judgment below must be reversed.

¶3Judgment reversed.

/10/wend/258 · .json · Public domain