Burr v. Waterman

New York Supreme Court

Burr v. Waterman

18 Johns. 508

DecidedJanuary 15, 1821

StatusPublished

This text of 18 Johns. 508 (Burr v. Waterman) 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

Burr v. Waterman, 18 Johns. 508 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1821).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

It has been the uniform practice in this Court, for a great many years, instead of issuing a scire fa-cias quart execulionem non, according to the English practice, to enter a rule, on the return of the writ of error, that the plaintiff in error'assign errors in twenty days, or that his default be entered. The defendant in error gives notice to the plaintiff in error, that the writ has been returned and filed, and that thereupon a rule has been entered, that the plaintiff in error assign errors, &c. This notice must be served on the plaintiff in error, or his attorney. . This we [510]*510consider to be the settled and established practice of this Court; and there has, therefore, been no irregularity on the part of the defendant in error. But as there appears to have been a misunderstanding as to the practice, we shall grant the motion to set aside the default, without costs.

Motion granted accordingly.

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

Per Curiam.

It has been the uniform practice in this Court, for a great many years, instead of issuing a scire fa-cias quart execulionem non, according to the English practice, to enter a rule, on the return of the writ of error, that the plaintiff in error'assign errors in twenty days, or that his default be entered. The defendant in error gives notice to the plaintiff in error, that the writ has been returned and filed, and that thereupon a rule has been entered, that the plaintiff in error assign errors, &c. This notice must be served on the plaintiff in error, or his attorney. . This we [510]*510consider to be the settled and established practice of this Court; and there has, therefore, been no irregularity on the part of the defendant in error. But as there appears to have been a misunderstanding as to the practice, we shall grant the motion to set aside the default, without costs.

Motion granted accordingly.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 Johns. 508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/burr-v-waterman-nysupct-1821.