Haynes v. Sherman... .4 N. Y. Supp. 413 Judgment of the general term reversed, and of special term affirmed. 22 Judgment reversed and submitted for further proceedings. 22 N. E. Rep. Jonasch v. Standard Gas-Light Co. of New York................. .4 N. Y. Supp. 542 Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Řep. 1131. Jones v. City of New York... .3 N. Y. Supp. 946 Order affirmed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1119. Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1126. Jourdan v. Haran... Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1128. Kane v. City of Brooklyn.. Judgment affirmed. 21 Ñ. E. Rep. 1053. Keenan v. O'Brien... Appeal dismissed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1119. Koehler v. Farmers' & Drovers' Nat. Bank of Somers.... Order affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1134. Kosmak v. City of New York... Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 945. Kramer v. Amberg.... Lauer v. Dunn..... .3 N. Y. Supp. 541 .1 N. Y. Supp. 306 .5 N. Y. Supp. 490 .6 N. Y. Supp. 470 .6 N. Y. Supp. 453 ..4 N. Y. Supp. 613 ..5 N. Y. Supp. 161 Order affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 270. Order affirmed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1119. Appeal dismissed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1118. Appeal dismissed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1127. Majority of Trustees of Santa Eulalia Silver Min. Co.. Marine Ave., In re.... Order affirmed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1119. Mason, In re... McBride v. McBride.. .4 N. Y. Supp. 174 .4 N. Y. Supp. 299 .4 N. Y. Supp. 664 .5 N. Y. Supp. 388 .3 N. Y. Supp. 418 Judgment reversed and new trial granted. 23 N. E. Rep. 164. .4 N. Y. Supp. 790 ..5 N. Y. Supp. 64 .5 N. Y. Supp. 881 .6 N. Y. Supp. 49 .6 N. Y. Supp. 171 1 N. Y. Supp. 651 Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1132. Nash v. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co..... .1 N. Y. Supp. 269 Newell Universal Mill Co. v. Muxlow.. Order affirmed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1048. Newell Universal Mill Co. v. Muxlow.... Order reversed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1048. Appeal dismissed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1134. Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1022. Judgment reversed, and judgment ordered for appellant. 21 N. E. Rep. 719. Roe v. Vingut... .1 N. Y. Supp. 914 Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 933. Rosenbaum, In re........................ .6 N. Y. Supp. 184 Order of special term reversed, and order of general term affirmed. 23 N. .1 N. Y. Supp. 515 Order of general term reversed, and judgment of special term affirmed. 22 Judgment affirmed. 23 N. E. Rep. 175. Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 160. Staten Island Rapid Transit Co. v. City of New York....... ..5 N. Y. Supp. 575 Stewart v. Robinson.. Studer v. Bleistein.. Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 243. Sweeney v. New York Steam Co.. Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1131. Swenson v. Mahopac Iron Ore Co... Judgment affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1130. .2 N. Y. Supp. 309 .1 N. Y. Supp. 187 .6 N. Y. Supp. 528 .6 N. Y. Supp. 520 .4 N. Y. Supp. 761 .6 N. Y. Supp. 146 .2 N. Y. Supp. 493 Order affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 360. United States Trust Co. v. Mutual Ben. Life Ins. Co..... Judgment reversed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1025. Vail v. Reynolds.... ..4 N. Y. Supp. 543 ...4 N. Y. Supp. 322 .5 N. Y. Supp. 872 .3 N. Y. Supp. 906 Judgment reversed and demurrer overruled. 22 N. E. Rep. 209. .4 N. Y. Supp. 173 .6 N. Y. Supp. 346 Judgment reversed and new trial granted. 23 N. E. Rep. 183. .5 N. Y. Supp. 522 .4 N. Y. Supp. 761 .7 N. Y. Supp. 110 .5 N. Y. Supp. 355 .1 N. Y. Supp. 613 Judgment reversed and new trial granted. 22 N. E. Rep. 566. .4 N. Y. Supp. 817 .5 N. Y. Supp. 951 .5 N. Y. Supp. 942 .2 N. Y. Supp. 683 Appeal dismissed. 21 N. E. Rep. 1118. Wilcox v. Corwin..... Judgment reversed and new trial granted. 23 N. E. Rep. 165. .3 N. Y. Supp. 317 Winton v. Winton.... Order of general term reversed, and that of special term affirmed. 22 N. E. Rep. 379. Wood v. Mitchell Orders reversed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1125. Woodward, In re... .5 N. Y. Supp. 537 .6 N. Y. Supp. 948 ...6 N. Y. Supp. 186 Judgment affirmed. 23 N. E. Rep. 120. Zink, In re Petition of... ...3 N. Y. Supp. 4 Appeal dismissed. 22 N. E. Rep. 1129. See End of Index for Tables of New York Supplement Cases in Other Reports. THE New York Supplement. VOLUME VII. LITTMAN V. COULTER. (City Court of New York, Special Term. May, 1889.) SET-OFF AND COUNTER-CLAIM-WHAT CONSTITUTES. In an action for rent defendant may set up a counter-claim for conversion of certain articles alleged to have been taken from the premises by plaintiff and wrongfully applied on the rent claimed, as the two causes arise out of the same transaction, within the meaning of Code of Civil Proc. N. Y. § 501, defining counterclaims. On demurrer to answer. Action by Morris Littman against Mary M. Coulter, administratrix of Thomas Coulter, for rent. Defendant set up in her answer a counter-claim for conversion of property by plaintiff. Plaintiff demurs to said counterclaim. Adolph L. Sanger, for plaintiff. William L. Flagg, for defendant. HOLME, J. A cause of action for conversion may be set up as a counterclaim to a cause of action on contract, provided the two causes arose out of or were connected with the same transaction. Weston v. Turver, 1 N. Y. Supp. 807; Farrell v. Krone, 24 Wkly. Dig. 89; Morris v. Emmons, 4 N. Y. St. Rep. 882; Cass v. Higenbotam, 100 N. Y. 248, 3 N. E. Rep. 189. The old cases to the contrary have been repeatedly overruled. No other construction of section 501 of the Code1 seems to me reasonable. The difficulty in cases like the one before me arises from the diverse views that may be entertained as to whether the facts constituting the counter-claim arose out of the transaction referred to in the complaint. In this case the plaintiff sues for rent of certain premises. The defendant sets up, as a counter-claim, damages for conversion by plaintiff of certain articles which were on the same premises, and which plaintiff is alleged to have taken, appropriated, and applied on account of the rent claimed. The defendant, in effect, alleges that the plaintiff claims a lien for the rent on the property alleged to have been converted. It is difficult for me to see how a cause of action thus arising is not connected with the occupation of the premises and the claim for rent which constitutes this transaction, out of which plaintiff's cause of action 1This section provides that one subject of a counter-claim shall be "a cause of action arising out of the contract or transaction set forth in the complaint as the foundation of the plaintiff's claim, or connected with the subject of the action. " v.7N.Y.s.no.1-1 |