Camp v. Root
18 Johns. 22
Opinion
This is plainly a case of submission to arbitration ; it is, in no respect, a reference under the statute. The parties chose to enter their submission upon the minutes of the Court, and to direct the arbitrator to make report to the Court; but all this does not vary the rights of the parties, nor authorize the Court to give judgment immediately on the award.
The submission to arbitration was a discontinuance of the suit.
In the case of Yates v. Russell, in the Court of Errors,
Footnotes
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Camp v. Root, 18 Johns. 22 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1820).
18 Johns. 22 (Camp v. Root) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Campbell v. Campbell
44 App. D.C. 142 (D.C. Circuit, 1915)
Callanan v. Port Huron & Northwestern Railway Co.
27 N.W. 718 (Michigan Supreme Court, 1886)
McNulty v. . Solley
95 N.Y. 242 (New York Court of Appeals, 1884)
Perrigo Gold Mining & Tunneling Co. v. Grimes
2 Colo. 651 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1875)
Hills v. Passage
21 Wis. 294 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1867)
Healy v. Gilman
6 Rob. 479 (The Superior Court of New York City, 1866)
Buel v. Dewey
22 How. Pr. 342 (New York Supreme Court, 1862)
Crooker v. Buck
41 Me. 355 (Supreme Judicial Court of Maine, 1856)
McColley & Bros. v. Hickman
1 Del. 234 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1856)
Messenger v. Broom
1 Pin. 630 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1846)
Ross v. Nesbit
7 Ill. 252 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1845)