Edleson v. Duryee

New York Supreme Court

Edleson v. Duryee

59 How. Pr. 326, 28 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 607

DecidedJuly 15, 1880

StatusPublished

This text of 59 How. Pr. 326 (Edleson v. Duryee) 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

Edleson v. Duryee, 59 How. Pr. 326, 28 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 607 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1880).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam. —

The appellant is right in his contention. The order to file the answer was ex parte and costs should not have been allowed (Bowne agt. Armstrong, 13 How., 301). Besides it was a judge’s order (See Brevoort agt. Warner, 8 How., 321). A party might as well insert motion costs in an order of arrest or for time to answer. The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements of the appeal.

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

Per Curiam. —

The appellant is right in his contention. The order to file the answer was ex parte and costs should not have been allowed (Bowne agt. Armstrong, 13 How., 301). Besides it was a judge’s order (See Brevoort agt. Warner, 8 How., 321). A party might as well insert motion costs in an order of arrest or for time to answer. The order should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements of the appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

59 How. Pr. 326, 28 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/edleson-v-duryee-nysupct-1880.