New York Supreme Court, 1894

Horton v. Horton

Horton v. Horton
New York Supreme Court · Decided December 10, 1894 · Cullen
31 N.Y.S. 588; 90 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 213; 64 N.Y. St. Rep. 142 (New York Supplement)

Counsel

Coleman & Donohue (Charles W. Coleman, of counsel), for appellant., Wm. M. Du Bois, for respondents.

Horton v. Horton

Opinion of the Court

CULLEN, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment rendered at the special term dismissing the plaintiff’s complaint. We have little doubt that the decision of the trial court was right, on the facts proved, and that it was justified in finding that the plaintiff" did execute the release despite her final statement to the contrary. But the plaintiff objected to the proof of the release, on the ground1 that no such defense was pleaded, and excepted to the ruling of the court admitting it in evidence. This objection was well founded.. A release of a cause of action is an affirmative defense, and must be pleaded. McKyring v. Bull, 16 N. Y. 297; Kirchner v. Sewing Mach. Co., 135 N. Y. 182, 31 N. E. 1104. The judgment appealed from should be reversed, and new trial ordered, costs to abide event.

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