Campbell v. Mayor of New York

U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

Campbell v. Mayor of New York

33 F. 795, 1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2184

CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York

DecidedFebruary 15, 1888

StatusPublished

This text of 33 F. 795 (Campbell v. Mayor of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Campbell v. Mayor of New York, 33 F. 795, 1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2184 (circtsdny 1888).

Pincite

Opinion

Wheeler, J.

A bill, called a “supplemental bill,” appears to have been filed in this cause by- a party other than the orator, against the orator and others. To that bill some of the defendants filed pleas, and some a demurrer. The demurrer appears to be set down for argument at the next term. The pleas do not appear to be set down for argument at all, or traversed. When the cause was reached on the calendar it was taken on briefs to be submitted as to one plea, in the absence of counsel for the orator in the supplemental bill, at the request of counsel for the party filing the plea. Since then it is made to appear that leave had been obtained to withdraw the pleas, and that notice had been given by counsel who obtained the leave that the pleas were withdrawn. The pleas, or some of them, may have been renewed, or there may be question as to the effect of the withdrawal. However these things may be, there is so much doubt whether there is any question upon the plea, or in regard to it, properly now before the court, that it seems best to continue the whole to the hearing on the demurrer.

Hearing on pleas continued to hearing on demurrer.

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

Wheeler, J.

A bill, called a “supplemental bill,” appears to have been filed in this cause by- a party other than the orator, against the orator and others. To that bill some of the defendants filed pleas, and some a demurrer. The demurrer appears to be set down for argument at the next term. The pleas do not appear to be set down for argument at all, or traversed. When the cause was reached on the calendar it was taken on briefs to be submitted as to one plea, in the absence of counsel for the orator in the supplemental bill, at the request of counsel for the party filing the plea. Since then it is made to appear that leave had been obtained to withdraw the pleas, and that notice had been given by counsel who obtained the leave that the pleas were withdrawn. The pleas, or some of them, may have been renewed, or there may be question as to the effect of the withdrawal. However these things may be, there is so much doubt whether there is any question upon the plea, or in regard to it, properly now before the court, that it seems best to continue the whole to the hearing on the demurrer.

Hearing on pleas continued to hearing on demurrer.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 F. 795, 1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2184, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-mayor-of-new-york-circtsdny-1888.