Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2 Abb. Pr. 382

Saltus v. Kip

The Superior Court of New York City

Decided January 15, 1856

The Superior Court of New York City · decided 1856-01-15

Motion to set aside an order for assessment of plaintiff’s damages and for leave to answer. This was an action of assault and battery. Within twenty days after service of the summons and complaint, the defendant appeared by attorney, but made default in answering. When the time to answer had expired, the plaintiffs applied exparte and obtained an order that his damages be assessed by a jury.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently March 1887

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1856-01-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

BoswoRTH, J.

¶1The order to assess damages could only be granted on an application for the relief demanded by the complaint. No notice of the application having been given, it is irregular and must be set aside {Code, § 246, subd. 2).

¶2The answer contains no defence; — on a demurrer to it for insufficiency, judgment would be given for the plaintiff. (Laws of 1855, ch. 44; Lane v. Gilbert, 9 How. Pr. R., 150). In such a case the damages would be assessed in the same manner as if no answer had been put in. (Code, § 269).

¶3*383The same proceedings may be bad under the Code, on assessing damages on a default to answer, as were allowed under the old practice on executing a writ of inquiry. A defendant may call witnesses and prove any matter which properly goes to mitigate damages. He may of course prove all the facts and circumstances relating to, and any immediate provocation which in the judgment of law tends to mitigate, damages.

¶4The motion for leave to put in the proposed answer is denied.

/2/abbpr/382 · .json · Public domain