Field v. Howland
17 Johns. 85
Opinion
The conduct of the plaintiff’s attorney is equivalent to an abandonment of his suit; and if the defendant had applied, after obtaining a regular discharge under the act, for a discontinuance, we should have ordered a rule for that purpose, to be entered. We think, under these circumstances, that the motion ought to be granted.
Motion granted.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Field v. Howland, 17 Johns. 85 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 1819).
17 Johns. 85 (Field v. Howland) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Collins & Co. v. Rodolph
3 Greene 299 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1851)
Graham v. Pierson
6 Hill & Den. 247 (New York Supreme Court, 1843)
President v. Osgood
1 Cow. 65 (New York Supreme Court, 1823)