Blydenburgh v. . Cotheal

4 N.Y. 418
CourtNew York Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 5, 1850
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 4 N.Y. 418 (Blydenburgh v. . Cotheal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Blydenburgh v. . Cotheal, 4 N.Y. 418 (N.Y. 1850).

Opinion

Bronson, Ch. J.

As a general rule the court does not inquire into the fractions of a day, except for the purpose of guarding against injustice. (Small v. McOhesney, 3 Cowen, 19. Chite v. Chite, 3 Benio, 263.) We think that a sufficient answer to this motion.

Motion denied.

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

Related

Ellingham v. Morton
116 A.D.2d 1032 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1986)
People v. Alouisa
120 Misc. 2d 968 (New York County Courts, 1983)
Lanni v. Grimes
173 Misc. 614 (New York Supreme Court, 1940)
Croveno v. . Atlantic Ave. R.R. Co.
44 N.E. 968 (New York Court of Appeals, 1896)
William Ottmann & Co. v. Hoffman
28 N.Y.S. 28 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1894)
Pooley v. . City of Buffalo
26 N.E. 16 (New York Court of Appeals, 1890)
Mitchell v. Schoonover
17 P. 867 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1888)
Pressley v. Board of Commissioners
80 Ind. 45 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1881)
Willoughby v. Brown
4 Colo. 120 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1878)
United States v. Norton
97 U.S. 164 (Supreme Court, 1878)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
4 N.Y. 418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blydenburgh-v-cotheal-ny-1850.