Simmons Co. v. Well Diggers
| Decision Date | 04 November 1954 |
| Citation | 206 Misc. 874 |
| Parties | John Simmons Co., Inc., Plaintiff,<BR>v.<BR>Well Diggers, Inc., Defendant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court |
Julius Wolfson for plaintiff.
Louis Friedmann for defendant.
Upon the foregoing papers this motion for judgment on the pleadings in favor of plaintiff is granted. Defendant's argument that plaintiff's failure to include in the schedule annexed to the complaint the invoice dates of each of the items, excused defendant from compliance with the requirement of section 255-a of the Civil Practice Act as to specific denials with respect to delivery, performance, reasonable value or agreed price, is untenable. "The word `items' as used in section 255-a will generally mean the particulars in such detail that the account may be readily examined and its correctness tested entry by entry" (Innis, Pearce & Co. v. G. H. Poppenberg, Inc., 213 App. Div. 789, 790). The section itself requires merely the setting forth and numbering of the items of the claim and the reasonable value or agreed price of each. Here the complaint alleges the sale and delivery of goods over a period of less than two months and the schedule contains fourteen numbered items which are specifically described as to type of article, quantity, list price, discount, and agreed price. The details thus furnished are deemed sufficient to have enabled defendant to identify the particular items to be denied, if such was its intention. Accordingly, the general denial interposed was insufficient to put in issue the items comprising plaintiff's claim and the allegations of the complaint stand as admitted. Settle order.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Belmet Products, Inc. v. Merit Enterprises, Inc.
...of the C.P.A. and thus leaves no issue with respect to the allegations of the first cause of action. (John Simmons Co. Inc. v. Well Diggers, Inc., 206 Misc. 874, 135 N.Y.S.2d 538.) (Spiegel, Inc. v. Fashion Play Togs, Inc., Sup., 83 N.Y.S.2d 762.) (Bertolf Bros., Inc. v. Leuthardt, 261 App.......
-
Shirk Oil Co. v. Peterman
...240, 241 (1954); Checotah Hardware Co. v. Housel, 169 Okla. 112, 114, 35 P.2d 966, 967 (1934). See John Simmons Co. v. Well Diggers, Inc., 206 Misc. 874, 875, 135 N.Y.S.2d 538, 539 (1954). The district court properly sustained the motion for summary IV. Peterman claims finally that he was d......
-
Matter of Tschirky
... ... It is in the opinion of this court well settled that a legatee of an estate is not entitled to assert a claim as such legatee against the ... ...