New York Supreme Court, 1888

Taggart v. Wade

New York Supreme Court · Decided December 13, 1888 · Barnard

3 N.Y.S. 322; 21 N.Y. St. Rep. 320; 50 Hun 606; 1888 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 621 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Martin & Smith and M. W. Divine, for motion. Franklin & Clifford and H. H. Bartlett, for respondent.

Opinion of the Court

Barnard, P. J.

Assuming that the principle upon which the affirmance of the plaintiff’s cause of action depends is right, the interlocutory decree *323appealed from should contain provisions for the allowance to the defendant upon the accounting for repairs and. improvements, and for interest paid on a prior mortgage on the property. The omission of the provision in the decree was overlooked. A general accounting was provided for, but was restricted so as to exclude these items of expenditure, if there be such. The motion for a reargument should therefore be granted, without costs.

Pratt, J., concurs.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.