Case Name: JAMES S. MERTAGE, Respondent v. SIDNEY A. BENNETT, Appellant
Court: New York Superior Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1891-07-02
Citations: 27 Jones & S. 572
Docket Number: 
Parties: JAMES S. MERTAGE, Respondent v. SIDNEY A. BENNETT, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Superior Court of the city of New York
Volume: 59
Pages: 572–573

Head Matter:
JAMES S. MERTAGE, Respondent v. SIDNEY A. BENNETT, Appellant.
■Bill of particulars, when not ordered. The complaint fully set forth the ■ contract to recover damages for a breach of which the action was brought, and its term, from which it appears that the contract toas made for a certain sp>ecified term, and ai a -rate agreed on, and that under it the plaint- ■ ought to recover for the term specified (except for jhe first two weeks') . -1 at the rate agreed on. Held, that a motion for a bill of particulars \ ■ as properly denied.
Before Freedman, Dugro and Gildersleewe, JJ.
Decided July 2, 1891.
Appeal from an order denying defendant’s motion for a bill of particulars of plaintiff’s claim.
Sol Kohn, attorney and of counsel, for appellant.
Isaac L. Sink, attorney and of counsel, for respondent.

Opinion:
The Court (Freedman, J., writing, Dugro and Gildersleeve, JJ., concurring) held as stated in the headnote.