Bank of Orange v. Brown

New York Supreme Court

Bank of Orange v. Brown

1 Wend. 31

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1828

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1 Wend. 31 (Bank of Orange v. Brown) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bank of Orange v. Brown, 1 Wend. 31 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1828).

Pincite

Opinion

By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

The rule for judgment absolute, was irregularly entered in the cause of the Bank of Orange against the defendant on the first day of the term. The postea, &c. may be filed on the first day of term, and the rule for judgment entered nisi, but the judgment cannot regularly be signed until four days in term have intervened. If a contrary practice has prevailed, it is wrong. The motion, however, to set aside the proceedings will not be granted, because the party applying is not entitled to be heard. This is an irregularity of which no one but the defendant has a right to avail hirnself. A defendant may give preferences, and by permitting a plaintiff to enter his judgment irregularly, he may as effectually give him a priority, as though he had signed a cognovit; besides, .he may have released all errors and irregularities. The motion is denied with costs.

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

By the Court,

Sutherland, J.

The rule for judgment absolute, was irregularly entered in the cause of the Bank of Orange against the defendant on the first day of the term. The postea, &c. may be filed on the first day of term, and the rule for judgment entered nisi, but the judgment cannot regularly be signed until four days in term have intervened. If a contrary practice has prevailed, it is wrong. The motion, however, to set aside the proceedings will not be granted, because the party applying is not entitled to be heard. This is an irregularity of which no one but the defendant has a right to avail hirnself. A defendant may give preferences, and by permitting a plaintiff to enter his judgment irregularly, he may as effectually give him a priority, as though he had signed a cognovit; besides, .he may have released all errors and irregularities. The motion is denied with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Wend. 31, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bank-of-orange-v-brown-nysupct-1828.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack