Cleaveland v. Hunter
1 Wend. 104
Opinion
By the Court,
It is a matter of sound, discretion with the referees, to open a cause after it has been submitted to them, for the purpose of hearing further testimony ; and it is to be-presumed that they will discreetly exercise such discretion. Here an important question was left in doubt, in their minds, which they believed could be dispelled by further proof; they therefore did right in adjourning the cause, to give the party an opportunity of producing further testimony. The motion is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cleaveland v. Hunter, 1 Wend. 104 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1828).
1 Wend. 104 (Cleaveland v. Hunter) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Diehl v. Cotts
37 S.E. 546 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1900)
Pratt v. Stiles
9 Abb. Pr. 150 (New York Supreme Court, 1859)
Ayrault v. Sackett
17 How. Pr. 461 (New York Supreme Court, 1858)
Duguid v. Ogilvie
1 Abb. Pr. 145 (New York Court of Common Pleas, 1854)