Clayton v. Per Dun

New York Supreme Court

Clayton v. Per Dun

13 Johns. 218

CourtNew York Supreme Court

DecidedMay 15, 1816

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 13 Johns. 218 (Clayton v. Per Dun) 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

Clayton v. Per Dun, 13 Johns. 218 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1816).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam*

The evidence clearly shows, that the justice kept a tavern in fact; aqd whether he had, or had not,, a license for. that purpose, he Was equally disqualified for trying causes as a justice.- Nof is It material .that the suit was instituted before he became, so disqualified;. nor would it cure the defect if .the, plaintiff below did áppéar and consent, to the trial, becaiise such consent .could not confer jurisdictioft. Low v. Rice,, (8 Johns. Rep. 409.,) on the-two; last points, is.decisive.

The. judgment must, be reversed*

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

Per Curiam*

The evidence clearly shows, that the justice kept a tavern in fact; aqd whether he had, or had not,, a license for. that purpose, he Was equally disqualified for trying causes as a justice.- Nof is It material .that the suit was instituted before he became, so disqualified;. nor would it cure the defect if .the, plaintiff below did áppéar and consent, to the trial, becaiise such consent .could not confer jurisdictioft. Low v. Rice,, (8 Johns. Rep. 409.,) on the-two; last points, is.decisive.

The. judgment must, be reversed*

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 Johns. 218, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/clayton-v-per-dun-nysupct-1816.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack