Delong v. Curtis — 42 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 94

Majority

p. 94

STEPHEN S. DELONG, Plaintiff, v. REUBEN S. CURTIS and DORPHEUS WAIT, Defendants.

Headnote

The release of one wong-doer releases those liable jointly with him.

Several owners of water privileges joined in raising the height of a dam, whereby a quarry belonging to the plaintiff was flooded. The plaintiff settled his claim with some of the wrong-doers, and gave to one of them a release, under seal, from all claims arising from the raising of the dam. The instrument provided that it was understood that it was not to apply to or to affect any person interested in the dam, except the one named, and reserved and excepted all claims the plaintiff had against any and all the said persons.

JHeld, that he thereby released all the wrong-doers.

Motion for judgment on a verdict directed for the defendants at the Jefferson Circuit, subject to the opinion of the General Term.

The action was brought to recover damages sustained by the plaintiff in bis quarry by the flooding of the same by means of water settling back in consequence of a dam built and maintained by the defendants. The plaintiff bad taken sums of money in satisfaction of bis claims against certain of the persons who joined in raising the dam, and bad given to one of them named Ear well a release under seal, which relóased him from all claims from any matter growing out of the raising of the dam, but proceeded, “ it is understood and expressly agreed, that this release is not to apply to or in any manner to affect any party interested in the said dam, except the said A. M. Earwell and bis heirs and assigns, reserving and excepting all claims I have against any and all the persons interested in the same dam.”

M. Ballard, for the plaintiff.

Porter c& Watts, for the defendant Wait.

George 8. Mooher, for the defendant Curtis.

Satisfaction of damages sustained by plaintiff by one tort feasor or trespasser was satisfaction as to all the wrong-doers. A release of-one, upon satisfaction by that one, operates as a discharge of all the wrong-doers. Mitchell v. Allen ( 25 Hun, 543 ) quodrates with

p. 95

the case before us, and is an authority entitled to our following. (See, also, Barrett v. Third Am. R. R. Co., 45 N. Y., 628 ; Lovejoy v. Murray, 3 Wallace, 1, and cases cited in opinion.) One satisfaction for damages sustained by a wrongful act is all the plaintiff is entitled to receive. (Knickerbacker v. Colver, 8 Cowen, 111.)

Ve think the motion should be granted and judgment ordered for the defendants on the verdict, with costs.

BoaedmaN and Follett, JJ., concurred.

Motion granted and judgment ordered for defendants on the verdict, with costs.