Britt v. Van Orden

1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 99, 1 Cole. Cas. 96
CourtNew York Supreme Court
DecidedApril 15, 1800
StatusPublished

This text of 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 99 (Britt v. Van Orden) 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
Britt v. Van Orden, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 99, 1 Cole. Cas. 96 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1800).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This was an irregularity in practice not to be countenanced. Let the plaintiff take the effect of his motion, with costs to be paid by the defendant’s attorney himself.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 99, 1 Cole. Cas. 96, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/britt-v-van-orden-nysupct-1800.