Blydenburgh v. . Cotheal

4 N.Y. 418
New York Court of Appeals·Decided December 5, 1850·Published·Cited by 12 cases

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

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

4 N.Y. 418 (Blydenburgh v. . Cotheal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

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)