Anonymous

5 Cow. 423
New York Supreme Court·Decided May 15, 1826·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The constant practice is otherwise. The excuse is for the court, not for the party; and may De shown at the time of moving.

Emmet then read an affidavit, showing that certain questions of law would arise before the referees, specifying them. These would arise under the plea of the statute of limitations.

[424]*424 Curia.

The questions which you stale are of easy soluqon_ Questions of law may, and to a certain extent, must arise on every reference. We must be' satisfied, however, that they are questions of real difficulty, to warrant our denying a reference on this ground. The doctrine of evidence upon the plea of the statute of limitations, is, in general, very well settled.

Motion denied.

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

Anonymous, 5 Cow. 423 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1826).

5 Cow. 423 (Anonymous) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Patterson v. Stettauer
7 Jones & S. 413 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1875)
Dewey v. Field
13 How. Pr. 437 (New York Supreme Court, 1856)
Lusher v. Walton
1 Cai. Cas. 149 (New York Supreme Court, 1803)