Study aid, not legal advice. caselaw is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice or engage in the unauthorized practice of law (UPL). All briefs, outlines, and citation tools on these pages are educational summaries for law students; they are not a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney admitted in your jurisdiction. Bar-admission rules vary by state. For court filings or client matters, verify every authority against the official reporter and your court's local rules. Use of caselaw does not create an attorney-client relationship.
James D. Warner, Treasurer of Erie County, Respondent, v. Joseph Lessler et al., Appellant, 1865 — 33 N.Y. 296 · caselaw · US
Civil Procedure · MBE-tested
James D. Warner, Treasurer of Erie County, Respondent, v. Joseph Lessler et al., Appellant
33 N.Y. 296·New York Court of Appeals·1865·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
James D. Warner, Treasurer of Erie County, Respondent, v. Joseph Lessler et al., Appellant.
Action to foreclose a mortgage executed by defendants to Christian Mentz, Jr., as treasurer of Erie county, to secure the payment of a certain bond conditioned to pay a sum therein named to the obligee or to his successors in office, in trust for certain infants therein named. The complaint contained the necessary averments, showing the plaintiff entitled to maintain the action for forclosure. The answer contained a general denial of the facts set out in the complaint. The issue was referred to a referee who reported that the allegations and facts stated in the complaint were true, except as to the amount claimed to be due, or to become due. The proper reference was again made to ascertain the amount due; and on the coming in, filing and confirmation of the .last report, a decree of forclosure was entered, and sale ordered. On appeal therefrom to the General Term, the same was affirmed, and an appeal was taken by the defendants to this court. The appellant submitted no points.
[MAJORITY]
Held, that, as the appellant had pointed out no error in the proceedings of the court below, and the only defense set up in the answer was a general denial of the allegations in the complaint, which the referee ha,d found for the plaintiff; and as there appeared to be no error in the proceedings below, this was a proper case for imposing a penalty upon the appellant.
The judgment of the General Term was affirmed with ten per cent penalty.