Akroyd v. Klug

Saratoga Chancery Court

Akroyd v. Klug

1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 39, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 250

DecidedMay 4, 1841

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 39 (Akroyd v. Klug) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Saratoga Chancery Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Akroyd v. Klug, 1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 39, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 250 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1841).

Pincite

Opinion

Decided in this case that an objection that the defendant is in contempt is not a sufficient answer to an application that the complainant elect whether he will proceed in this court or in a court of law for the same cause. That it is only when the party in contempt applies for a favor that such an objection is available. But that the granting an application that the complainant elect is a matter of right, and not of mere favor. Order of reference as to identity of causes of action, and for an attachment against defendant.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Decided in this case that an objection that the defendant is in contempt is not a sufficient answer to an application that the complainant elect whether he will proceed in this court or in a court of law for the same cause. That it is only when the party in contempt applies for a favor that such an objection is available. But that the granting an application that the complainant elect is a matter of right, and not of mere favor. Order of reference as to identity of causes of action, and for an attachment against defendant.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Sarat. Ch. Sent. 39, 1841 N.Y. LEXIS 250, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/akroyd-v-klug-nychanctsara-1841.