Coster v. Waring
19 Wend. 97
Opinion
By the Court,
The sole object of the 88th rule was to regulate the costs of amendment after demurrer. We cannot look into the pleadings, on a motion of this kind, in a case circumstanced like the present. If the plaintiff’s attorney considered the demurrer frivolous, he should have moved for judgment on that ground.
Motion granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Coster v. Waring, 19 Wend. 97 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1838).
19 Wend. 97 (Coster v. Waring) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Gill v. Stebbins
10 F. Cas. 379 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1828)