Anderson v. Vandenburgh

1 How. Pr. 212
New York Supreme Court·Decided June 15, 1845·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Jewett, Justice.

Denied the motion with costs on the ground that Clark & Pattison attended the term in good faith, with an intention to oppose the motion as they were bound to do by the notice served on them, and in consequence of the omission of plaintiff’s attorneys in addressing their original papers to Clark & Pattison, they had good reason to suppose there might be two causes between the same parties, and took a rule for costs regularly.

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

Anderson v. Vandenburgh, 1 How. Pr. 212 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1845).

1 How. Pr. 212 (Anderson v. Vandenburgh) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bowghen v. Nolan
53 How. Pr. 485 (New York Marine Court, 1877)