Bosworth v. Perhamus

20 Wend. 611
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1839
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 20 Wend. 611 (Bosworth v. Perhamus) 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
Bosworth v. Perhamus, 20 Wend. 611 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1839).

Opinion

By the Court, Cowen, J.

The second section of the statute provides that, in the case made by the defendant’s affidavit, the plaintiff may be called and examined as a witness in the same manner as other witnesses may be called and examined. No doubt this court has power to grant the motion ; but the putting off trials for the reason that material witnesses are absent, is an office which can be more discreetly exercised by the circuit judge. Non constat that the plaintiff will not attend upon due notice that his presence is required. Where the plaintiff is the real party in interest, and a sworn defence is interposed according to the statute, it is no doubt reasonable to require his personal attendance on the usual affidavit of materiality, even though he be [612]*612a non-resident of the state, provided the defendant shall desire it. The circuit judge, however, has the power to postpone the trial, the same as in other cases, and should be appealed to. The motion is denied ; but without costs.

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

Related

Kingsland v. Cowman & Gillender
5 Hill & Den. 608 (New York Supreme Court, 1843)
Vermilyea v. Rogers
4 Hill & Den. 567 (Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, 1843)
Rapelye v. Prince
4 Hill & Den. 119 (Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, 1843)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
20 Wend. 611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bosworth-v-perhamus-nysupct-1839.