New York Supreme Court, 1894

Heywood Boot & Shoe Co. v. Ralph

Heywood Boot & Shoe Co. v. Ralph
New York Supreme Court · Decided December 4, 1894 · Herrick
31 N.Y.S. 263; 82 Hun 418; 89 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 418; 63 N.Y. St. Rep. 580 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Lawrence Russell, for appellant., F. N. Cleaveland (Ledyard P. Hale, of counsel), for respondent

Heywood Boot & Shoe Co. v. Ralph

Opinion of the Court

HERRICK, J.

The judgment in this case should be affirmed. The defendant did not keep his tender good, by paying the amount thereof into court at the commencement of this action, and alleging that fact in the answer. It was not paid into court until the day of trial, —too late to stop the costs of the action, and too late to stop the running of interest, the purposes for which it is required the tender should be made, and kept good by a deposit in court. Becker v. Boon, 61 N. Y. 317; Halpin v. Insurance Co., 118 N. Y. 165, 23 N. E. 482. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs. All concur.

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