Dando v. Doll

New York Supreme Court

Dando v. Doll

2 Johns. 88

DecidedNovember 15, 1806

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Johns. 88 (Dando v. Doll) 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

Dando v. Doll, 2 Johns. 88 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1806).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment is clearly regular and in form against both defendants. There is no plea or suggestion of any defence by Doll, who has merely pleaded mil tiel record. On this judgment and this plea we have no alternative; but must say that the plaintiff is entitled to judgment. We give no opinion what it would be proper to decide, on any other plea, or statement of Acts submitted to the court.

Judgment for the plaintiff.

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

Per Curiam.

The judgment is clearly regular and in form against both defendants. There is no plea or suggestion of any defence by Doll, who has merely pleaded mil tiel record. On this judgment and this plea we have no alternative; but must say that the plaintiff is entitled to judgment. We give no opinion what it would be proper to decide, on any other plea, or statement of Acts submitted to the court.

Judgment for the plaintiff.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Johns. 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dando-v-doll-nysupct-1806.