Butterworth v. Stagg

New York Supreme Court

Butterworth v. Stagg

2 Johns. Cas. 291

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedJuly 15, 1801

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 2 Johns. Cas. 291 (Butterworth v. Stagg) 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

Butterworth v. Stagg, 2 Johns. Cas. 291 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1801).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is evidently an abuse of the process of the court. It is a contempt to bring a fictitious suit, or to use the name of another, without his privity or consent. If we do not interfere, the nominal plaintiff may be materially injured ; and when it is in our power to afford him relief, in this summary mode, as for a contempt, we ought to do it, and reach the real person who has perverted the process of the court. We therefore grant the rule. (Coxe v. Phillips, Cas. temp. Hardw. 237. 4 Bl. Com. 285.)

Rule granted. (

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

Per Curiam.

This is evidently an abuse of the process of the court. It is a contempt to bring a fictitious suit, or to use the name of another, without his privity or consent. If we do not interfere, the nominal plaintiff may be materially injured ; and when it is in our power to afford him relief, in this summary mode, as for a contempt, we ought to do it, and reach the real person who has perverted the process of the court. We therefore grant the rule. (Coxe v. Phillips, Cas. temp. Hardw. 237. 4 Bl. Com. 285.)

Rule granted. (

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Johns. Cas. 291, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/butterworth-v-stagg-nysupct-1801.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack