Case Name: Louis Wolfe, App'lt, v. John P. Schmenger, Resp't
Court: New York City Court
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1887-04
Citations: 9 N.Y. St. Rep. 516
Docket Number: 
Parties: Louis Wolfe, App’lt, v. John P. Schmenger, Resp’t.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 9
Pages: 516–517

Head Matter:
Louis Wolfe, App’lt, v. John P. Schmenger, Resp’t.
(City Court of New York , General Term,
Filed April, 1887.)
Costs—Offeb to allow judgment—Effect of. amendment of com> plaint.
The effect of an offer to allow judgment must be determined by the state of the pleadings at the time it was made. If the complaint be amended by dropping some of the causes of action and reducing the recovery sought, it ceases to be binding, on the defendant, and hence is not conclusive against the plaintiff. In other words, it became for all purposes nugatory.
Appeal from order made at special term, reversing taxation of costs by the clerk.
A. L. Sanger, for app’lt; T. C. Ennever, for resp’t.

Opinion:
Ehrlich, J.
While not prepared to hold that the service of amended pleadings, pending an offer of judgment, must ipso facto and in all cases annul the offer of judgment, yet in the case at bar, the order should be reversed and the clerk's taxation affirmed for the reason that the parties cannot be fairly presumed, to have intended or understood, that the offer of judgment upon certain specific claims, should hold good and apply to others, widely different, set forth in the amended complaint.
The order, therefore, should be reversed with the usual costs and disbursements, and the clerk's taxation affirmed.