Ekhart v. Dearman

New York Supreme Court

Ekhart v. Dearman

2 Cai. Cas. 379, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 422

DecidedFebruary 15, 1805

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Cai. Cas. 379 (Ekhart v. Dearman) 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

Ekhart v. Dearman, 2 Cai. Cas. 379, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 422 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1805).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The defendant’s conduct has not been perfectly regular. He ought, according to the rules of practice, to have obtained a judge’s order to enlarge the time to plead, or a certificate to stay proceedings. But though there was an irregularity in the defendant, and the plaintiff was correct in entering the default, he has waived both by silently acquiescing *in the event of a motion which he knew must be successful. By not appearing his language is, I consent to the application. If so, he certainly agrees to relinquish the default, and every other advantage. .

Motion granted.

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

Per Curiam.

The defendant’s conduct has not been perfectly regular. He ought, according to the rules of practice, to have obtained a judge’s order to enlarge the time to plead, or a certificate to stay proceedings. But though there was an irregularity in the defendant, and the plaintiff was correct in entering the default, he has waived both by silently acquiescing *in the event of a motion which he knew must be successful. By not appearing his language is, I consent to the application. If so, he certainly agrees to relinquish the default, and every other advantage. .

Motion granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Cai. Cas. 379, 1 Cole. & Cai. Cas. 422, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ekhart-v-dearman-nysupct-1805.