Home/New York Supreme Court/Bliss v. Rice

Bliss v. Rice

9 Johns. 159
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedMay 15, 1812
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 9 Johns. 159 (Bliss v. Rice) 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
Bliss v. Rice, 9 Johns. 159 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1812).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The rule is settled, that if an error in fact is we][ assigned, and the defendant in error pleads in nullo est erratum, he confesses the fact. It was so laid down by Hale, Ch. J. in Okeover v. Owerbury, (T. Raym. 231.) who put the very case of infancy assigned for error. (9 Viner, 550.) The judgment must be reversed.

Judgment of reversal.

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

Related

Trustees of Vernon Society v. Hiles
6 Cow. 23 (New York Supreme Court, 1826)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
9 Johns. 159, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bliss-v-rice-nysupct-1812.