PRACTICE REPORTS 61 IN THE SUPREME COURT AND COURT OF APPEALS, OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. BY NATHAN HOWARD, JR., VOLUME XLII. ALBANY : WILLIAM GOULD & SONS, LAW BOOKSELLERS AND PUBLISHERS. 1871. Entered according to act of Congress, in the year eighteen hundred and seventy-one BY WILLIAM GOULD & SONS, In the Office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. PRACTICE REPORTS. SUPREME COURT. LEONARD F. BANCROFT agt. CORNELIUS SHANNON, respond ent. The plaintiff recovered of defendant, in a justice's court a verdict for $50, besides costs. The defendant appealed to the county court, and in his notice of appeal specified two grounds of error, as follows: "The judgment should be more favorable, to him in the following particulars: 1st. The judgment should baye been for the defendant with costs. 2d. The plaintiff was entitled to recover no more than ten dollars, if any thing." On the trial in the county court the plaintiff recovered a verdict of $40: Held, that both particulars mentioned in the defendant's notice of appeal were insufficient, under the Code, and that the plaintiff was entitled to costs. Binghamton General Term, December, 1870. APPEAL from a readjustment of costs by the county court, on an appeal from a justice's judgment. E. C. MOODY, for plaintiff and appellant. By the court, MILLER, P. J.-The plaintiff in justice's court recovered a verdict for fifty dollars besides costs. The defendant appealed to the county court, and the notice of appeal claimed that the judgment should be more favorable to him in the following particulars: 1st. The judgment |