Brandt ex dem' M'Cleland v. Burrows

3 Cai. Cas. 140, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 483
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedAugust 15, 1805
StatusPublished

This text of 3 Cai. Cas. 140 (Brandt ex dem' M'Cleland v. Burrows) 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
Brandt ex dem' M'Cleland v. Burrows, 3 Cai. Cas. 140, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 483 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1805).

Opinion

Per curiam.

The defendant knew you were entitled to stipulate, he therefore comes prepared, if you do that, to make his other motion. If you elect to have judgment of nonsuit against you, it is in your power. If not, you must stipulate, and then the motion for the commission will be granted.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
3 Cai. Cas. 140, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brandt-ex-dem-mcleland-v-burrows-nysupct-1805.