Byrne v. Romaine
1 Edw. Ch. 318, 1832 N.Y. LEXIS 232, 1832 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 26
Opinion
-The case of Burrall v. Raineteaux related to a demurrer, and shows that this mode of enlarging time is not admissible in such cases. But I cannot think there is any occasion to enter an order in the clerk’s office for the purpose of giving force or effect to a chamber order granting [319] further time to answer. The service of a copy thereof ought riot to have been treated as a nullity. Under the circumstances, I will not give costs against the complainant: but his application is refused.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Byrne v. Romaine, 1 Edw. Ch. 318, 1832 N.Y. LEXIS 232, 1832 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 26 (N.Y. 1832).
1 Edw. Ch. 318 (Byrne v. Romaine) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Clark v. Judson
2 Barb. 90 (New York Supreme Court, 1847)