Majority
p. 836Carl J. Carlson, Respondent, v. Jacob Albert, Appellant. Second Department, March 1, 1907.
Headnote
Pleading—when causes should be separately stated.A complaint for sums due the plaintiff on a breach of contract of service and for damages caused by the breach sets out two causes of action, which should he separately stated'.
■ Appeal by the. defendant, Jacob Albert, from an order of the County .Court of Kings county, entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings, on the 26th day of January, 1901, denying the defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff to separately state and number'the two causes of action set forth in the complaint.
J. Charles Wesehler \_8ol Rothsehild with him on the brief], for the appellant.
Robert P. Beyer, for the respondent.
The complaint contains two causes of action, viz., one for the amount due tó the plaintiff on his contract of service for a year at the time of its breach by his discharge by the defendant, and the other for the damages caused by the breach. They are not one
p. 837
cause of. action; the test is that a recovery on one of them would not bar an action on the other (Perry v. Dickerson, 85 N. Y. 345 ). The order should be reversed and the motion granted.
Woodward, Jenics and Bioh, JJ., concurred.
Order of. the County Court of Kings county reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and motion granted, with costs.
Cases cited
- Perry v. Dickerson 85 N. Y. 345 p. 837